Clemson Postgame

[ncjacket79]

Four plays to get two yards, and the new staff....all geniuses according to some try gimmicks instead of punching it in. I hope that is not a sign of thing to come in the future.

If TO keeps on 3rd down I think he scores. If he threw the ball properly on 4th he had 2 guys open. You can criticize having him in the game but we should have scored given the play calls

 

[684Bee]

They good

Excellent post. Can’t wait to read your analysis of USF.

 

[ncjacket79]

Swlling would have had to be a ballet dancer to even attempt a cutback on the pick. There are all kinds of things about mass and velocity and objects in motion, but he was a 20-pound man hurtling fullspeed down the sideline while another 200-pound man also at full speed, took the angle that at those speeds Swilling could not reverse or even attempt it. So we got two great plays out of one, a goal line stand to end all stands -- four shots from two yards? -- followed by a long TD drive. Put them all together and you might have just seen this Clemson team come together.

The only play I question was the option run/pass thing on fourth down, with a QB who just can't do that sort of thing. It seemed to me on 4th and goal, time to challenge the team to man up and get that yard against an inexperienced Clemson D line, Collins blinked. (Yeah, yeah. I know. That was his OC. Which means that was Collins.)

I just wish Tre had put his shoulder down and delivered a blow rather than being forced ob. Make the guy pay and possible drive him into the end zone.

 

[iceeater1969]

Excellent post. Can’t wait to read your analysis of USF.

The coaching justice warriors can't accuse this guy of picking sides.

 

[chewybaka]

I think "the halo" should be reinstated only for when the the receiver signals a fair catch.

Someone is going to get hurt...not good

 

[gt02]

Four plays to get two yards, and the new staff....all geniuses according to some try gimmicks instead of punching it in. I hope that is not a sign of thing to come in the future.

I don’t have a problem with us losing, and even losing bad. Playing #1 on the road in first game. My problem is two gimmick plays out of four from the two yard line. After all that talking this summer about how we were going to bring the offense into the future? And the best we got is the old “act like you can’t hear the coach” play that was barely good enough for B league flag football?

 

[Skeptic]

Does everything have to be about the coaching comparison? Last year this group of kids under the old regime lost 49 - 21 at home. Under the new coaching staff with pretty much the same roster it was 52 - 14 on the road. I know that this isn't popular around here, but maybe both staffs, while having different strengths and weaknesses, are about the same? (I know about drawing conclusions from a sample size of 1). So maybe we would have scored last year under Paul's scheme. But, at the end of the day, does it really matter?? That touchdown was not the difference in the game. Maybe the issue really isn't scheme...perhaps it's the Jimmies and Joes? And the new guy seems to understand this and is trying to upgrade our effectiveness in this area.

What in the wide, wide world of sports are you talking about? The post did not compare anybody. He questioned decisions, period. Goodness, nobody brought the previous coach or coaches into it. A lot of us do. I remember a lot of questions about the previous regime, and nobody was comparing the situation to Gailey... just the situation. Frankly I thought if the guy is going to spend so much time talking about culture and trust and relationships, down there at the 1 on 4th down was a good time to show, not tell, his team he trusted them ... and run straight into a gap against that inexperienced Clemson D line. Even had it failed it would have sent a message. If there is a coaching comparison it would be with Venables. He is not a guy to trifle with down there.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

As soon as he was knocked out of bounds at the 2 I thought "OH ****, WE AIN'T GONNA SCORE...."

I looked at my wife and said, we will probably end up with a FG, if we are lucky.

 

[jeffgt14]

Ok watched the 2nd half finally. We may have actually scored this half but we looked abysmal especially on defense. Maybe Clemson went into half and realized just how awful our front 7 was and just ran it down our throat but they were terrible. We are going to get absolutely whipped by Duke and Pitt if we don't fix something up there.

Graham throws a nice deep ball but I'm not sure him starting over Oliver is going to make much of a difference. I thought Oliver played well. Needs to learn some pocket presence but he's very decisive on the run and that is clearly the strength of our offense with Mason and Howard. WR's were getting zero separation. Brown looked like the only receiver who knows how to run a route.

It is also funny that this is probably the most high school looking offense I have ever seen us have.

 

[iceeater1969]

THEY GOOD is surrounding the play calling.

At the goal line post near pick six ( almost espn high lite):::
I have no issues w play calling for first 3. I thought the quick snap was well called and it seemed well executed.
On 4th would have loved to have seen TO roll right and a pitch to cottrell foot race to corner.

AS FL tech says THEY GOOD.

 

[bobongo]

Ok watched the 2nd half finally. We may have actually scored this half but we looked abysmal especially on defense. Maybe Clemson went into half and realized just how awful our front 7 was and just ran it down our throat but they were terrible. We are going to get absolutely whipped by Duke and Pitt if we don't fix something up there.

Graham throws a nice deep ball but I'm not sure him starting over Oliver is going to make much of a difference. I thought Oliver played well. Needs to learn some pocket presence but he's very decisive on the run and that is clearly the strength of our offense with Mason and Howard. WR's were getting zero separation. Brown looked like the only receiver who knows how to run a route.

It is also funny that this is probably the most high school looking offense I have ever seen us have.

Lots of positives about Oliver, with just one fatal flaw. We must have a QB who can throw the football.

 

[Animal02]

I don’t have a problem with us losing, and even losing bad. Playing #1 on the road in first game. My problem is two gimmick plays out of four from the two yard line. After all that talking this summer about how we were going to bring the offense into the future? And the best we got is the old “act like you can’t hear the coach” play that was barely good enough for B league flag football?

Exactly!!

 

[Animal02]

What in the wide, wide world of sports are you talking about? The post did not compare anybody. He questioned decisions, period. Goodness, nobody brought the previous coach or coaches into it. A lot of us do. I remember a lot of questions about the previous regime, and nobody was comparing the situation to Gailey... just the situation. Frankly I thought if the guy is going to spend so much time talking about culture and trust and relationships, down there at the 1 on 4th down was a good time to show, not tell, his team he trusted them ... and run straight into a gap against that inexperienced Clemson D line. Even had it failed it would have sent a message. If there is a coaching comparison it would be with Venables. He is not a guy to trifle with down there.

Apparently you are not allowed to question ANYTHING the new staff does....according to the Kool aid drinkers .....oh and accept 3 win seasons until they have ALL of their own recruits.

 

[Animal02]

If TO keeps on 3rd down I think he scores. If he threw the ball properly on 4th he had 2 guys open. You can criticize having him in the game but we should have scored given the play calls

The ball not set for play was an odd set of events. It should have been a 5 yard penalty if the call was correct. I can only assume the refs screwed up and did not assess the penalty to make up fore it

 

[Lotta Booze]

Lots of positives about Oliver, with just one fatal flaw. We must have a QB who can throw the football.

Come on, give him a little more credit than that.

This is from last year's game against Clemson. Clutch 4th & 7 throw under a lot of pressure

He can throw.

Also from last year's Clemson game.

I've gotta imagine the fact that he's played this Clemson team before and made some clutch throws was a big part of why TO got the start Thursday, along with his obvious running ability.

And while Graham threw some bombs Oliver had the longest pass of the night on the wheel route to Howard. Most of that not thru the air but still...

Obviously coming out of that game everyone wants to see more of Graham but you can't deny that Oliver can play.

 

[AE 87]

Come on, give him a little more credit than that.

This is from last year's game against Clemson. Clutch 4th & 7 throw under a lot of pressure

He can throw.

Also from last year's Clemson game.

I've gotta imagine the fact that he's played this Clemson team before and made some clutch throws was a big part of why TO got the start Thursday, along with his obvious running ability.

And while Graham threw some bombs Oliver had the longest pass of the night on the wheel route to Howard. Most of that not thru the air but still...

Obviously coming out of that game everyone wants to see more of Graham but you can't deny that Oliver can play.

He had blocking, not just guys trying to play paddycakes.

AmIdoinit right?

 

[bobongo]

Come on, give him a little more credit than that.

This is from last year's game against Clemson. Clutch 4th & 7 throw under a lot of pressure

He can throw.

Also from last year's Clemson game.

I've gotta imagine the fact that he's played this Clemson team before and made some clutch throws was a big part of why TO got the start Thursday, along with his obvious running ability.

And while Graham threw some bombs Oliver had the longest pass of the night on the wheel route to Howard. Most of that not thru the air but still...

Obviously coming out of that game everyone wants to see more of Graham but you can't deny that Oliver can play.

I didn't mean to imply he was not capable of completing a pass. Not denying Oliver can play. I like Oliver - he's a gamer. But I think we need a more consistent passing threat under center. He's not going to be threading very many needles.

 

[takethepoints]

A few observations:

• Before the game I kept posting in the threads about the OL that our real worry was the DL. Yep. The OL looked ok for it's first game in a new offense - the whole O looked ok for a first game, imho, especially since it was against the defending national champion. The DL and LBs left something to be desired. Admittedly, they were working for the first time in a new D, had the appropriate teething problems, and were on the field far too long. But this was where our concerns should have been pre-season.

• Did I mention that it was a first game in a new O? Yes, I see I did. Everyone bellyaching about Tobias's play should remember that. I thought he played pretty well and I don't understand the folks here who say he can't throw. He can. And he can run. What he needs - listening, Coach? - is more double options to run. He was running too many called QB sweeps. He's talented, so that worked. For awhile. Mind, I understand the decision process.

• I said before the season that I suspected that Graham could end up as our starting QB on sheer athletic ability. I'll stand by that. I don't know that he will; we'll have to see how the O works when it isn't up against a top 10 D. There's no question that he's something on a football field, however.

• We have to learn how to run the shotgun spread so as to eat more clock. If there was one thing I didn't like one bit in the game it was that we were in and out too quickly. I know Coach and P want to run an up tempo O. Fine. We should do that most of the time. We should also be ready to run the O for ToP as well. Clemson did it and wore our D out fairly quickly.

• One of the things I liked about the spread option is that a team that blitzed as much as Clemson did was asking for and usually got it. It's bothersome to suddenly have to worry about the blitz when we finally have a QB(s) who can throw. But there it is. The RBs will simply have to get used to it. Again, more double options would help.

• I know what Dabo's bedtime prayer after the game was. "Dear Lord, thank you for your infinite mercy and for not making my team face James Graham in the spread option offense." Because, sports fans, that would have been a very different ball game. We would have lost, of course, but it would have been different.. And no question that James would have been our starter, imho.

 

[knoxjacket]

A few observations:

• Before the game I kept posting in the threads about the OL that our real worry was the DL. Yep. The OL looked ok for it's first game in a new offense - the whole O looked ok for a first game, imho, especially since it was against the defending national champion. The DL and LBs left something to be desired. Admittedly, they were working for the first time in a new D, had the appropriate teething problems, and were on the field far too long. But this was where our concerns should have been pre-season.

• Did I mention that it was a first game in a new O? Yes, I see I did. Everyone bellyaching about Tobias's play should remember that. I thought he played pretty well and I don't understand the folks here who say he can't throw. He can. And he can run. What he needs - listening, Coach? - is more double options to run. He was running too many called QB sweeps. He's talented, so that worked. For awhile. Mind, I understand the decision process.

• I said before the season that I suspected that Graham could end up as our starting QB on sheer athletic ability. I'll stand by that. I don't know that he will; we'll have to see how the O works when it isn't up against a top 10 D. There's no question that he's something on a football field, however.

• We have to learn how to run the shotgun spread so as to eat more clock. If there was one thing I didn't like one bit in the game it was that we were in and out too quickly. I know Coach and P want to run an up tempo O. Fine. We should do that most of the time. We should also be ready to run the O for ToP as well. Clemson did it and wore our D out fairly quickly.

• One of the things I liked about the spread option is that a team that blitzed as much as Clemson did was asking for and usually got it. It's bothersome to suddenly have to worry about the blitz when we finally have a QB(s) who can throw. But there it is. The RBs will simply have to get used to it. Again, more double options would help.

• I know what Dabo's bedtime prayer after the game was. "Dear Lord, thank you for your infinite mercy and for not making my team face James Graham in the spread option offense." Because, sports fans, that would have been a very different ball game. We would have lost, of course, but it would have been different.. And no question that James would have been our starter, imho.

Have you watched the previous four Clemson games? James Graham running the spread option would’ve gotten shut down just like JT running it, Taquon running it, or TO running it.

Remember “physical superiority cancels all theories”?

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Vegas knows what they’re doing

Three reasons why we won't win the Coastal: Offensive line, Defensive line, Bryce Perkins and UVA are right now far better judging by their first game with Pitt. A very good team is UVA but still no match for Clemson and they may not beat Miami.