Get a FREE 30-day trial using promo code BGI30

It was far from a perfect day for the Notre Dame pass catchers, but there were several positives to take from the game and build on.

Notre Dame’s receivers and tight ends accounted for 15 receptions and 254 yards, and outside of a couple of bad drops we saw them make several good plays on the football. The route running as a group was solid and the blocking for the receivers was solid as well, especially down the field.

Let’s take a look at the target numbers for the pass catchers against Ball State.

This data point refers to the catch rate for each receiver/tight end. This one is simple, it simply evaluates how many times a pass was caught when a receiver was targeted. Success depends on the pass catcher making the grab but also requires a good throw from the quarterback. It’s not just a receiver evaluation.

For example, junior Chase Claypool’s numbers in this breakdown are poor, with just 37.5 percent of his passes being completed, and the Irish had a horrendous 22.49 rating when it threw in his direction. But Claypool isn’t the reason for those issues. Quarterback Brandon Wimbush forced two balls to Claypool that he simply should not have thrown, which drags down Claypool’s rating.

Some numbers that do standout is the yards per target number for Miles Boykin and Chris Finke. Finke’s season number is impressive (see below), but Boykin was the standout against Ball State because of how often he was targeted. To put his 13.2 yards per target into context, consider that Ole Miss receiver A.J. Brown – who many believe to be the best receiver in the country – averaged 13.1 yards per target last season.

Boykin had 13.2 yards per target against Ball State and has 13.4 yards per target through two games this season. Finke’s 15.8 yards per target on his six targets (five catches) is also really impressive.

Now let’s look at the rating per target:

The numbers listed above reflect the rating for each receiver when he is targeted with a pass. It is tabulated the same way that you would see for a quarterback rating. It measures how effective and efficient the offense is when it targets specific players.

Targets are throws that a quarterback is obviously meaning to go to a specific receiver. If a quarterback throws the ball away in the direction of a receiver that is not considered a target, it is simply a throwaway.

Boykin’s rating is especially effective when you consider that a ball he dropped resulted in an interception. For context, Brown had a 143.9 rating on targets last season, and the leading returners this season in the Big Ten (135.7), ACC (137.6), Big 12 (136.3) and Pac 12 (129.6) were all below Boykin’s mark against Ball State and lower than his current season total.

Right now Boykin’s sample size is quite small relative to returners who played a full season in 2017, but it certainly is a strong start to the season, with Boykin looking to emerge as the team’s top pass catcher.

Boykin was targeted just three times against Michigan, with one target being eliminated by a penalty, but he was Notre Dame’s top target against Ball State (9 targets).

Finke also has strong rating numbers to the start the season.

Now for the individual breakdowns:

Boykin was quiet in the first half and failed to catch a pass, and he was targeted just twice, with one target resulting in a third-down dropped pass. It was obvious in the second half that offensive coordinator Chip Long made a concerted effort to get Boykin more involved in the offense.

The senior wideout was targeted five times on the offense’s first nine plays of the third quarter, with Boykin hauling in four passes for 80 yards. Long’s confidence in Boykin was obvious on the series after Boykin’s dropped pass that was intercepted, which was a tipped pass that hit him in the hands and is a play he absolutely must make. On the very first play of the next series Long went right back to Boykin, throwing the same route that was previously dropped and picked, and Boykin rewarded his coach and quarterback's confidence by hauling it in for a 23-yard gain.

While the two drops were disappointing for a player with such excellent ball skills, we also saw why Boykin is the team’s top wide receiver. Boykin did a good job working himself open down the field, and his body control/ball skills were impressive.

This is a well-placed ball by Wimbush, but Boykin also did an outstanding job flipping his hips and making the grab. He had a tough 20-yard gain on a throw in which the defensive back pushed him in the back before the ball arrived, but Boykin was still able to lock in and haul in the catch.

If not for the two drops his grade would have been much higher, but hopefully the second half of this game will be a sign that Wimbush and Boykin are getting on the same page, which is a good sign for future games.

It’s not a surprise that the half when Wimbush targeted Boykin more he went 9-14 (64.3%) while going just 8-17 (47.1%) in the half where Boykin wasn’t featured. Half if Wimbush's second half throws were targeted to Boykin, and he caught six of them.

BOYKIN GRADE: B

The target and rating numbers mentioned above are not really on Claypool, as the two interceptions were on the quarterback, not the wide receiver. Claypool had a clutch 23-yard gain to convert a fourth-down, but overall his play was subpar.

There were way too many routes where Claypool obviously knew he wasn’t a primary read, so he jogged off the line and presented the defense with no threat. When that happens the safety is going to look elsewhere, and that’s what happened.

Moving forward his effort will have to be much, much better than we saw in this game.

CLAYPOOL GRADE: C-

The senior receiver was targeted just twice in the game, but he was open more than just those two throws. One thing that will help Finke maybe get some more throws on certain routes like crossers is for him to do a better job throttling down at times.

But when Finke was targeted he made plays. His first catch was a 27-yard gain on a wide fade route on the opening play of the game, but he was wide open on the play. His second catch was more impressive, and was another example that Finke is physically able to excel fro the Irish in the pass game.

Finke cannot throttle on this particular route because there is a linebacker trailing underneath him. He must keep working and when Wimbush throws the ball Finke has to know he’s going to get drilled, but he flips back to the ball and makes the grab. It was a perfectly played ball by Wimbush and a tough in-traffic catch by Finke.

FINKE GRADE: B

Senior tight end Alizé Mack had a solid game against Ball State. His blocking was decent, although he must continue to get better with that part of the game. Through two games Mack has not been as effective in the run game as he was in 2017.

Mack did a good job working open in the pass game and made a strong back hip catch to convert a 3rd-and-10 in the third quarter.

Mack didn’t do anything to stand out in this game, but he didn’t have any big mistakes either from what I saw.

MACK GRADE: C+

Sophomore tight end Cole Kmet had a strong 18-yard catch and run on a stick route, which was more about him dragging defenders than actually running downfield. He is a tough and physical player, but Kmet’s blocking is struggling because of deficient technique at this point. He missed multiple second level blocks because he took poor angles, and he has to work on keeping his feet moving when he makes contact.

He was injured in the second half but the full extent of that injury is not yet known.

KMET GRADE: C

----

• Talk about it inside Rockne’s Roundtable

• Subscribe to our podcast on iTunes

• Learn more about our print and digital publication, Blue & Gold Illustrated.

• Follow us on Twitter: @BGINews, @BGI_LouSomogyi, @BGI_CoachD, @BGI_DMcKinney and @BGI_CoreyBodden.

• Like us on Facebook.