Clemson 41 - GT 10

[bke1984]

Food for thought on the offensive performance from Ken’s article:

“…no power-conference opponent has been that ineffective on third downs (12.5% conversion rate) against Clemson since 2015 (also Tech, 1-for-12). And only one power-conference opponent gained fewer yards against the Tigers last season than the Jackets did Monday night.

In short, Tech was about as ineffective moving the ball against Clemson as any power-conference team can be.”

Ouch.

 

[bobongo]

Did you not watch the OL? You want to drive 80-90 yds downfield with the performance they gave.

Or 50 yards and kick a field goal. Why even show up if you're not going to try?

 

[SteamWhistle]

Some HARSH over reactions here. Despite the sub optimal clock management and miscues, it was 17-10 with 3:53 left in the 3rd, when DJ makes a play falling down to a RB that was on the ground only a second before he let it go. One play that probably sealed it for Clemson. Now I ask How many of you would’ve expected that we would have been one lucky Clemson play away from having a potential game tying drive to start the 4th qtr.

 

[bobongo]

Some HARSH over reactions here. Despite the sub optimal clock management and miscues, it was 17-10 with 3:53 left in the 3rd, when DJ makes a play falling down to a RB that was on the ground only a second before he let it go. One play that probably sealed it for Clemson. Now I ask How many of you would’ve expected that we would have been one lucky Clemson play away from having a potential game tying drive to start the 4th qtr.

I think on the whole, reactions have been reasonable. The things that went right have been acknowledged, and the warts have been pointed out. It was what it was. The main thing that troubled me was the abysmal play of the OL. It was against a very good DL, but I don't know about the effort. Are these guys in shape? I was a little disappointed overall with the result, but that's a personal problem. We'll get a much better indication of where the season's headed after the next couple of weeks.

Defense played well, even stellar for most of three quarters - and exceeded my expectation even as I thought going in that we would be improved. The potential is there for this defense to get us six W's.

 

[SOWEGA Jacket]

The reactions are fine. Clemson is no longer a juggernaut. Everyone who dismisses the average play we’ve seen because it was Clemson won’t be saying that after Clemson loses a few games. Sure, Clemson’s defense is very good especially their DLine but they are lacking impact players at DB, WR, and RB. Shipley is a decent college RB. Mapha is their best runner in my opinion. And he’s from Atlanta. They don’t have a Spiller or Etienne. Their WR’s were typical college types. Their DB’s were average and would have been exposed if we could have blocked their DLine. Bottom line, we got run yet again by a top 15 team who didn’t even play their best QB.

 

[slugboy]

Food for thought on the offensive performance from Ken’s article:

“…no power-conference opponent has been that ineffective on third downs (12.5% conversion rate) against Clemson since 2015 (also Tech, 1-for-12). And only one power-conference opponent gained fewer yards against the Tigers last season than the Jackets did Monday night.

In short, Tech was about as ineffective moving the ball against Clemson as any power-conference team can be.”

Ouch.

My first instinct is to dismiss that as sloppy analysis from Ken Suguira. However, our offense didn’t hold up its side of the bargain last night.

Here are some of the stats from GameOnPaper. We didn't get enough yards, and we didn't convert first downs. We didn't give our defense a rest. We missed blocks. We didn't get points.

Clemson was REALLY fast. I have to tip my hat to their team speed. A lot of good plays that could have gone for big yardage, didn't, because of their defensive speed. But, we were often one block away from a first down or more, and didn't make the block.

I do like ilovetheoption's perspective that we looked like a good team making mistakes instead of a bad team making mistakes. Maybe it's a "potential good team".
Clemson's numbers are heavily helped out by the 4th quarter.

 

[Ibeeballin]

You call a timeout. What happens if Clemson botched a snap or shanks a punt? If you get pinned at the 8 and don’t like your chances take the knee go to half but to not even try is low football iq.

So you want the OL that has been getting blown up to take a snap inside of its on 10?!? What possibly could go wrong???

With our penalty luck, we were more likely to get roughing the kicker than a block

 

[GT33]

Some HARSH over reactions here. Despite the sub optimal clock management and miscues, it was 17-10 with 3:53 left in the 3rd, when DJ makes a play falling down to a RB that was on the ground only a second before he let it go. One play that probably sealed it for Clemson. Now I ask How many of you would’ve expected that we would have been one lucky Clemson play away from having a potential game tying drive to start the 4th qtr.

That was one of the most maddening aspects. There we were with Clemson flailing around trying to get their dog of a QB going, giving them opportunity after opportunity because there was no inkling we could put any type of sustained drives together. We handed them the ball on the 5 yds line, it's what it took for them to score. They were free to let Uglylaylay continue to flop virtually without consequences, squander a bunch of chances, fail to get their offense moving, etc and we were powerless to capitalize. He really is a pretty crappy QB, we definitiely had the best QB on the field last night save Clemson's last drive. Had we mounted any type of threat, maybe they press & make a mistake, Uglylaylay takes a risk and delivers us a pick 6. Maybe they go to new guy and he's not all that or ready either & we have a real tight game at the end. We could have had them on the edge of their seats, but they sat there comfortably just waiting for a couple of scores to put the game out of reach. It's what good teams do to not so good teams. About 1 in 50-100 times an upset occurs, but last night it was not to be.

 

[alagold]

The weak link of Offiense is #67 O-Line. This dude missed I counted 4 critical blocks and had a few false starts. He is just not good at all and needs to be benched immediatly

Really, really--a R-F walkon I believe--this was his first GAME --starting before 2 "super" transfers from clem and bama
otoh--. #54 is a 2 yr letterman and his man caused havoc on Sims all game

 

[Eli]

So you want the OL that has been getting blown up to take a snap inside of its on 10?!? What possibly could go wrong???

With our penalty luck, we were more likely to get roughing the kicker than a block

So you have to take a snap out of shotgun? Did you even hear Collins explain why he didn’t call a timeout? It wasn’t because we were getting blown off the ball his reasoning is rather a head scratcher at best but the best I could understand was “I was afraid they would go for it.” Geez

 

[Ibeeballin]

So you have to take a snap out of shotgun? Did you even hear Collins explain why he didn’t call a timeout? It wasn’t because we were getting blown off the ball his reasoning is rather a head scratcher at best but the best I could understand was “I was afraid they would go for it.” Geez

I don’t listen to that nonsense

 

[alagold]

#81 probably had the worst game I’ve ever seen a tight end have. He was directly the cause of 1) Sims arm getting hit, leading to the pick, 2) dropping a key 3rd down conversion 3) That first blocked punt, and a host of other terrible mistakes that put us behind the 8-ball. If he and our Right tackle just had half the mistakes then we would have actually had an opportunity to keep the game exciting.

yep,BAD BAD game.Why in the world would he be in on that first play to block a monster DE? er,We only have 4 other TEs on scholly.
I see why Syracuse "lost" him. Also-you forgot when he caught a pass was tackled, fumbled but it went out of bounds.
He did catch one pass though,whoppee.

 

[bobongo]

So you have to take a snap out of shotgun? Did you even hear Collins explain why he didn’t call a timeout? It wasn’t because we were getting blown off the ball his reasoning is rather a head scratcher at best but the best I could understand was “I was afraid they would go for it.” Geez

"Afraid". The operative word. I don't know what changed between the time he went for it in on 4th and 2 in the first qtr. and the end of the half. The way our defense was playing I wanted them to go for it.

 

[alagold]

If I recall he has a rugby background from Ireland. Even though he never punted an american football prior to coming here, his style definitely has "rugby-style" moves to it and has practically zero resemblance to traditional american football punting technique. Most punt teams do very little blocking due to wanting to get downfield to cover the kick and to generally getting not much rush except for certain situations. I went to bed at halftime but the first block was due to his rugby-style technique and an unusual amount of rush that wasn't accounted for by our LOS. either someone has to coach our punter to quicken his pace which I doubt can happen or tell our blockers to watch out for and account for more rushing. This has been exposed as weakness after last night.

Back -blockers are there to BLOCK.At least one didn't,#17? One block is bad ,two is beyond inexcusable ..Welcome to Collins-ball.It basically turned the game around. They find a new way to lose every week. Next week, will it be fumbles.
Kills a fairly good overall.effort.

 

[bobongo]

If I recall he has a rugby background from Ireland. Even though he never punted an american football prior to coming here, his style definitely has "rugby-style" moves to it and has practically zero resemblance to traditional american football punting technique. Most punt teams do very little blocking due to wanting to get downfield to cover the kick and to generally getting not much rush except for certain situations. I went to bed at halftime but the first block was due to his rugby-style technique and an unusual amount of rush that wasn't accounted for by our LOS. either someone has to coach our punter to quicken his pace which I doubt can happen or tell our blockers to watch out for and account for more rushing. This has been exposed as weakness after last night.

One rugby move that could have helped would be to step to his right before kicking that second one. If he sees the guy coming, he realizes he's not going to get the punt off if he doesn't move. And, he's ambidextrous. He can move to either side and still kick it.

 

[Ibeeballin]

If I recall he has a rugby background from Ireland. Even though he never punted an american football prior to coming here, his style definitely has "rugby-style" moves to it and has practically zero resemblance to traditional american football punting technique. Most punt teams do very little blocking due to wanting to get downfield to cover the kick and to generally getting not much rush except for certain situations. I went to bed at halftime but the first block was due to his rugby-style technique and an unusual amount of rush that wasn't accounted for by our LOS. either someone has to coach our punter to quicken his pace which I doubt can happen or tell our blockers to watch out for and account for more rushing. This has been exposed as weakness after last night.

Both blocks were due to bad blocking and slow getting the ball off

 

[GTLorenzo]

Not everyone finds them humorous. Crack a joke once, it's funny. Keep it going repeatedly and it becomes obnoxious.

Thanks! Didn’t realize there was a one comment limit on our current situation.

 

[GTLorenzo]

You call a timeout. What happens if Clemson botched a snap or shanks a punt? If you get pinned at the 8 and don’t like your chances take the knee go to half but to not even try is low football iq.

Seriously, what are the odds of a botched snap on a punt having an impact on the outcome of a game?? That’s outrageous!!

 

[bobongo]

Thanks! Didn’t realize there was a one comment limit on our current situation.

I think it depends on your point of view.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

The reactions are fine. Clemson is no longer a juggernaut. Everyone who dismisses the average play we’ve seen because it was Clemson won’t be saying that after Clemson loses a few games. Sure, Clemson’s defense is very good especially their DLine but they are lacking impact players at DB, WR, and RB. Shipley is a decent college RB. Mapha is their best runner in my opinion. And he’s from Atlanta. They don’t have a Spiller or Etienne. Their WR’s were typical college types. Their DB’s were average and would have been exposed if we could have blocked their DLine. Bottom line, we got run yet again by a top 15 team who didn’t even play their best QB.

After my second time watching the game, I was encouraged by the open field tackling by linebackers and defensive backs. Disappointed by the lack of effort at times by well, number 72 and 81. Their blocking left a lot to be desired. No excuse for not at least hitting someone on a screen pass and going from slow to glacial in one play. I shudder to think what Coach Johnson would have said with that lack of effort. Sims nearly got killed a couple of times by linemen not putting a hat on someone. He needs to get in their face. As for Clemson, no longer the juggernaut but still a top 20 or so team. Number four in the nation? Laughable. I am holding to my preseason prediction of four wins but some of those ACC teams look beatable with improved line play and better execution on offense.