Blue & Gold Illustrated: America's Foremost Authority on Notre Dame Football
Issue link: https://comanpub.uberflip.com/i/1044500
18 NOV. 5, 2018 BLUE & GOLD ILLUSTRATED BY BRYAN DRISKELL H eading into its matchup against Navy last week, Notre Dame ranked No. 8 nationally in de‑ fensive efficiency according to the S&P+ at Football Outsiders — a prime reason why the Fighting Irish were 7‑0. It was a notable upgrade over Notre Dame finishing 27th in defensive effi‑ ciency during former coordinator Mike Elko's first and lone season in 2017. However, a deeper probe reveals the numbers are eerily similar to where a 6‑1 Notre Dame squad was after its 49‑14 beatdown of USC last season. • Through seven games in 2017, Irish foes were 30‑24 and averaged 16.4 points per game. This year, those num‑ bers were 28‑23 and 16.7. • After seven games in 2017, oppo‑ nents averaged 126.1 rushing yards per game and 3.6 yards per carry, and the Irish had recorded 45 tackles for loss. Following the first seven games in 2018, Irish foes averaged 126.1 rushing yards per game again and 3.5 yards per carry, while Notre Dame defenders had 46 tackles for loss. • During the first seven contests last season, the Notre Dame pass defense allowed merely 6.0 yards per attempt and 10.7 yards per completion, and had seven interceptions and 18 sacks. This year, the unit permitted only 5.6 yards per attempt and 9.8 yards per completion, and recorded seven inter‑ ceptions with 16 sacks. If Notre Dame is going to make a run to the College Football Playoff this No‑ vember, the Irish defense will have to finish far better than it did a season ago. Much of the focus on Notre Dame's 2017 November fade revolved around the offense, which managed only 17.3 points per game in the final three while losing twice. But the defense played its own role in the demise. Here are at least four reasons to be‑ lieve the 2018 defense is much more prepared to finish the season playing just as well as it started, if not even better: 1. MORE EXPERIENCE The 2017 unit featured three start‑ ers in the secondary that were soph‑ omores, three of its top ends were sophomores and its top backups at tackle were freshmen. They had gone through the 4‑8 debacle in 2016 and didn't fully know yet "how to win." All of the sophomore defensive backs and ends are now seasoned ju‑ niors. Veteran starters such as fifth‑ year senior nose guard Jonathan Bon‑ ner and senior rover Asmar Bilal are also more experienced, as is stronger sophomore nose guard Kurt Hinish. Foremost, almost every player in the current two‑deep knows what it is like to have the pressure of playing late‑season games that determine a chance to make the CFP. Past failure is often the greatest teacher for athletes. Second, the defense is more second nature to the non‑freshmen, resulting in more reacting and less thinking. Coordinator Clark Lea has more of the 2017 playbook available to him, which makes it harder for foes to have the full read on his defense. Third, every non‑freshman now has an extra year in director of football performance Matt Balis' strength pro‑ gram, which should reap dividends in the final month of the season. 2. MORE PLAYMAKERS This is especially the case up front. Notre Dame's 2017 defense was more about the collective ability of the group to play well together. When the whole didn't play as effectively, the entire defense faded. What has made the 2018 defense so good is that even when the entire unit isn't on top of its game, there are enough playmakers at every level that can take over or make a stop when the contest is on the line. Outside of cornerback Julian Love and occasionally linebacker Drue Tranquill, the 2017 defense lacked game changers. This season senior tackle Jerry Tillery, junior ends Kha‑ lid Kareem and Julian Okwara, and senior linebacker Te'von Coney have developed in that capacity — along with Love and Tranquill. Junior safeties Alohi Gilman and Jalen Elliott have also made the cru‑ cial plays lacking at that position last year. In the Vanderbilt victory, Gil‑ man stripped a receiver of the ball just inches away from the goal line, and Elliott ended the game with a crucial fourth‑down pass breakup. Versus Michigan, Gilman was vital to break‑ ing up two drive‑ending passes, and a week later Elliott picked off two passes in the hard‑fought win over Ball State. In 2017, the entire safety group com‑ bined for five passes broken up and zero interceptions in 13 games. In 2018, Gilman and Elliott alone combined for seven passes broken up and two inter‑ ceptions in seven contests. 3. BETTER DEPTH Most of Notre Dame's depth in 2017 was comprised of freshmen and soph‑ omores. Outside of linebacker, the 2018 depth chart is far more accomplished. The Irish have four players coming off the bench with at least four career starts — and two boast at least 10 ca‑ reer starts. Also, the production from rotation players has improved with junior ends Daelin Hayes and Ade Ogundeji, plus Hinish and freshman tackle Jayson Ademilola. 4. LESS PROVEN OPPONENTS In the first seven games of 2017, the Notre Dame defense faced only two of‑ fenses (Georgia and USC) that finished among the top 40 in efficiency accord‑ ing to the S&P+. However, all five of the late‑season foes ranked in the top 40, and four were in the top 30. Also, Notre Dame's final five opponents in 2017 had a 26‑8 record through the season's first eight weeks. Notre Dame's final five opponents in 2018 have a 19‑16 ledger and not one ranks among the top 30 in efficiency. Only Navy ranked in the top 40 in effi‑ ciency, and only two — Syracuse being the other — rank among the top 50. ✦ OLDER, FASTER, DEEPER The Fighting Irish defense is positioned for a stronger finish in 2018 than it had in 2017