In many ways the 2011 Notre Dame offense was a productive unit. The Irish offense had its best season on the ground in a decade, Michael Floyd set a school record for receptions in a season, Tyler Eifert set a school record for receptions and yards in a season by a tight end, and Notre Dame scored 50 points in multiple games for the first time since 1996.
There were times when the Notre Dame offense seemed unstoppable, capable of pounding teams on the ground and shredding them through the air. Rarely did Notre Dame step on the field against an opponent who could match the Irish skill.
Yet at the end of the day, the 2011 Notre Dame offense needs to be viewed as a disappointment for the very same positives that were mentioned above. Notre Dame was talented at the skill positions, it was a much better running team, and it had its best season from the line since 2005. But the Notre Dame offense also underachieved and failed to show up in the biggest moments of the season. An offense with the talent at the skill positions and the talent along the line should have been a lot better.
If Brian Kelly wants to get Notre Dame to the level it needs to be, that being a consistent BCS contender, he must fix the offense. Notre Dame has to become a more explosive, more productive, and most importantly a more consistent unit. With a brutal 2012 schedule, followed by an even more challenging 2013 schedule, the Notre Dame offense must emerge.
From a staff standpoint Kelly has already taken steps towards making that happen. Replacing Charley Molnar with Chuck Martin should yield positive results. Tim Hinton did a good job with the backs the last two seasons, but moving Tony Alford to the backfield stands as an upgrade. Harry Hiestand is known for developing physical and tough offensive lines, something Notre Dame needs up front.
Now it is up to Kelly and his new staff to put its stamp on the Irish offense and get this unit where it needs to be. Staff changes are just the first step. There are plenty of things Notre Dame can and should do to get its offense on track.
Earlier we discussed how Notre Dame can utilize its unique talent at tight end to exploit defenses. You can read that HERE.
Notre Dame also has unique personnel, depth and talent in the backfield.
Cierre Wood catches the ball well out of the backfield. He has caught 47 passes the last two seasons and is a legitimate pass catching threat. There is plenty more Notre Dame can do with him out of the backfield, including simple things like the quarterback actually looking for him more frequently on check downs.
Theo Riddick spent the last two seasons playing wide receiver. At times he was very good at that position and showed the ability to make plays in the screen game, up the seams, and on the perimeter.
George Atkinson was recruited as a wide receiver despite the fact he played running back in high school. His length, speed, strength, and home run potential made many believe he was ideally suited for the wide receiver position at Notre Dame. Cam McDaniel and Keivarae Russell are two more young players capable of getting touches out of the backfield or lined up outside in the slot.
Moral of the story: Notre Dame has a lot of interchangeable parts in the backfield.
Notre Dame’s backfield talent presents it with the opportunity to be creative with how it utilizes those players on the field at the same time. Wood and Riddick are two of Notre Dame’s best players, but with Riddick’s move to the backfield they now play the same position. Unless Notre Dame finds a way to use both players at the same time one of its best players will always be on the sideline.
That’s rarely a good idea. So how can Notre Dame go about using two running backs at the same time?
They can start by using Riddick, Atkinson, McDaniel, and Russell in the slot with another running back in the backfield. Notre Dame can also use two backs in the backfield at the same time. Out of the two back sets Notre Dame can motion backs into the slot, into the boundary, to the field, and it can also empty out of the backfield. These are general suggestions and if flushed out each one creates a number of fun possibilities for an offense.
Out of its two-back sets Notre Dame can get creative in the run game and in the pass game. As with the two tight end sets it presents defenses with unique challenges that it must address during the week of preparation. Defenses will be forced to spend extra attention during the week preparing for Notre Dame’s two-back personnel groupings. For the Irish, however, they can continue to run their basic offense so it does not necessarily require much additional work once it has been installed and established.
Atkinson is one player at this position that simply must have a role this fall. Notre Dame needs more speed and playmaking ability on offense. Atkinson lots of speed and playmaking ability. Granted he has never shown it as a running back on the nine carries he had as a freshman (seven of which came in one game), but there should be little doubt about what Atkinson can do with the football in his hands. One of the most disappointing aspects of the 2011 season to me was the fact Notre Dame never really tried to get Atkinson more involve in the offense. He showed against Michigan State and USC what he can do with the football in his hands. Why not try to get him more touches on offense? Atkinson is the type of player that does not necessarily need a lot of touches to make an impact. As a pure runner he needs to get into the flow more to really find his groove. But as a player that gets touches at running back, in the slot, and when thrown to out of the backfield he could be a game changer for the Irish.
Atkinson absolutely must get on the field next fall and the Irish coaches must figure out a way to get him the football every single week in some capacity.
Notre Dame can also use two tight ends and two backs on the field at the same time. Out of that personnel grouping Notre Dame can go entirely with a power set and pound the ball on the defense. It can also go four wide or empty and run its vertical pass offense. If installed properly that personnel grouping gives Notre Dame the ability to run a very wide array of plays without having to change personnel.
Defensively teams will be in a bind as they will be forced to go with bigger personnel on the field. The problem for them, however, is that Notre Dame could easily line Eifert out wide, Riddick in the slot, keep the one wide receiver out wide, and then have Koyack at tight end with Wood (or another back) still in the backfield. Now Notre Dame is in its base formation where it can equally attack with the run or pass. If teams go nickel Notre Dame can simply line up in tighter formations and power the ball at the smaller personnel. Even out of its base formation with this personnel grouping on the field Notre Dame holds a size advantage in the run game but still has athletic playmakers lined up out wide.
Not many defenses have the flexibility to line up and defend this type of look. Not many offenses have the talent at those two positions to be as diverse as Notre Dame can be.
Utilizing these various personnel groupings would not be overly difficult for the Notre Dame players or coaches. They could continue to run their base offensive schemes out of the varied personnel groupings. The defense must adjust to the personnel groupings, making Notre Dame a harder offense to prepare for without the Irish having to get super complex with how much it puts in each week.
Properly taking advantage of its unique talent at running back and tight end will give Notre Dame the potential to be explosive offensively while also keeping things simple enough for its quarterback and wide receivers to get comfortable early in the season.
This type of package could allow the Notre Dame offense to be very hard to prepare for, will allow more players to get involved in the gameplan, will make it more difficult for defenses to key on one or two particular players, and will take less pressure off the young quarterbacks.
In short, it would make the Notre Dame offense a much better unit this fall.
