Clemson Postgame

[BuzzStone]

Call it what you will, its stupid easy to see the run worked, the QB runs and passes did not.

We continued to call plays that had little to no chance to work.

Why abandon the run on 3rd or 4th down when it works?

 

[forensicbuzz]

Maybe I wasn't clear. We should have ran the ball until it didn't work, and not with king. The data shows our run game was tourching them. the QB runs and passes killed all momentumn

2nd pass on 1st drive dropped TD
Only pass on 2nd drive dropped TD

Passing was there. So was the run.

 

[Root4GT]

First drive- 13 yard run, pass pass punt
Second drive- 9 yard run, 1 yard run, King run/sack, King neg run, pass, punt
Third drive- run, sack, run, run TD
4th drive- pass, sack, pass, punt
5th drive- 40 yard run, run, pass, King run, punt
6th drive - run, run, run 1st down, Int

I could keep going but the passes and QB runs are what killed the offense.

16 or 24 plays you listed were runs. Yup we sure went pass happy running 67% of the plays you listed.

 

[leatherneckjacket]

Call it what you will, its stupid easy to see the run worked, the QB runs and passes did not.

We continued to call plays that had little to no chance to work.

Why abandon the run on 3rd or 4th down when it works?

Yeah, you convinced me. We should have run the ball on 4th and long instead of punting. You should call Key, or, better yet, call Batt and complain about the play calling on 4th down.

 

[bobongo]

I haven't gone back to watch it again today, but at the time my thought after watching the play and the highlights is exactly what CEB said. It looked to me like the punter was given the option by the coaches to look to see if the fake was on and tuck and run if it was. I think the punter made a risky decision and Tech's defense responded extremely well.

Clemson was "risky" that whole first half. They kept going for it on fourth down over and over . . . and kept picking it up. That, combined with the drops, killed us by halftime. I say risky in quotes because, besides the fake punt, I think each of the 4th down plays was correct according to the analytics. More coaches should be aggressive like that more often.

I don't doubt it at all, but what I noticed was that the punter did such a poor job of selling it. A fake punt where the punter takes off with it has to include a fake, or it won't very often work.
I do agree that coaches should try going for it on 4th down way more often than they do.

 

[cpf2001]

“Run until they prove they can stop it” feels a bit bull-headed unless the coaches had seen film from the first 9 games of the season indicating that it’s easy to gash Clemson for long runs. I don’t really believe run after run up the gut would’ve found the endzone in the first half.

 

[roadkill]

Maybe I wasn't clear. We should have ran the ball until it didn't work, and not with king. The data shows our run game was tourching them. the QB runs and passes killed all momentumn

Yes, it appears that I along with other posters misunderstood what you meant. Most would agree that a QB run is part of our run game, especially when he has the option to give or pull. After all, King was our leading rusher going into the game.

However, I still contend that had we abandoned the pass and QB runs, Clemson would have quickly figured that out and stopped it.

 

[LT 1967]

Mark Packer on ACC PM noted that all 4 of Clemson's interceptions were made by 4 different Freshmen. I hope we can improve by 2025 when these guys are Juniors and back on our schedule!

Just shows the depth of their talent.

 

[bobongo]

Yes, it appears that I along with other posters misunderstood what you meant. Most would agree that a QB run is part of our run game, especially when he has the option to give or pull. After all, King was our leading rusher going into the game.

However, I still contend that had we abandoned the pass and QB runs, Clemson would have quickly figured that out and stopped it.

Yeah, we're all looking for a way around the Clemson defense, and at the end of the day, there wasn't any.

 

[Jacket05]

2nd pass on 1st drive dropped TD
Only pass on 2nd drive dropped TD

Passing was there. So was the run.

The first pass on the 1st drive was a dropped screen pass by Jamal who had room to run. Jamal looked to run before the ball was in his hands and completely whiffed on the catch.

Everyone keeps calling out Singleton cause his drops were right at the end zone but all our receivers had bad days with plenty of drops, bad routes, and lack of fight for the ball to spread across the team.

 

[forensicbuzz]

The first pass on the 1st drive was a dropped screen pass by Jamal who had room to run. Jamal looked to run before the ball was in his hands and completely whiffed on the catch.

Everyone keeps calling out Singleton cause his drops were right at the end zone but all our receivers had bad days with plenty of drops, bad routes, and lack of fight for the ball to spread across the team.

Don't get so defensive. My answer was a quick hitter to the question about why we were passing so much. I actually think the throw to Jamal was low and tough to handle, but that wasn't really relevant to the point I was making.

 

[jgtengineer]

The ones in the middle don’t bother me. It’s the ones in the backfield or where they are behind the player that were infuriating.

Just grabbing isn't really holding anymore it's really only called if someone breaks away from the bind and you don't let go or alter them by grabbing jersey

 

[Tech Lawyer]

I was at the game. They outplayed us, but if we could have done a better job on those 4th down plays in the first half plus our drops - we are talking about a tie ball game at half. The Clemson WRs made two great TD catches as well. Haynes was not on his reads in the run game. He kept it several times - he should have handed it off and visa versa. My biggest observation of improvement was the DL- I thought those guys really played tough!

 

[Bogey]

I was at the game. They outplayed us, but if we could have done a better job on those 4th down plays in the first half plus our drops - we are talking about a tie ball game at half. The Clemson WRs made two great TD catches as well. Haynes was not on his reads in the run game. He kept it several times - he should have handed it off and visa versa. My biggest observation of improvement was the DL- I thought those guys really played tough!

Nice post. I wasn't there but I I agree with everything you said, especially your DL comment. We need another good game from them Saturday for sure.

 

[GT33]

In retrospect we had little chance of winning this game. Clemson was not the 4 loss Clemson. If we had them earlier in the season or maybe with Shipley out, ok, but not last Saturday.

As far as running the ball goes, we had it going but got too cute passing. I understand the game plan, but then they're gashing the D just keep running it. Screw your pre-planned playbook. When we did run the ball instead of attacking their D which was mostly effective we started running sideways. I personally do not like running sideways against big, fast teams. We don't have the horses nor that kind of speed. Same reason I don't like throwing 3 yds behind the LOS with those teams that are fast and big either, we lose the advantage we have with smaller slower teams. The OL just needs to hold long enough to get a pass off. Not sure they can hold long enough for slow developing routes and get away with it, but that's dictated on how the refs are calling the game.

 

[GTJake]

I was at the game. They outplayed us, but if we could have done a better job on those 4th down plays in the first half plus our drops - we are talking about a tie ball game at half. The Clemson WRs made two great TD catches as well. Haynes was not on his reads in the run game. He kept it several times - he should have handed it off and visa versa. My biggest observation of improvement was the DL- I thought those guys really played tough!

I think our play on both sides of the LOS has improved, especially OL. Keep all these guys and go find some LB's in the off-season. My biggest take from this game was that King got frustrated early and then took it on his self and tried to do too much ... but I love him for it !!

 

[Bogey]

I like King and the thing that i like the most when it is working is his penchant for hitting the long ball but it also bothers me the most when it is not working. And when we can't run the ball, it kills us. He, and we, should have a much better game Saturday running against a slower defense than Clemson.

 

[stinger78]

I watched the first quarter before I had to go. From that limited view, it appeared to me that CU adjusted to what we were doing early, shutting down open receivers and pressuring King. Our running game was never going to be a major factor with Clemson's front 7. From what I've seen, Clemson had their gut check, regrouped, and came out fighting the last two weeks. It's over.

Next.

 

[g0lftime]

I think our play on both sides of the LOS has improved, especially OL. Keep all these guys and go find some LB's in the off-season. My biggest take from this game was that King got frustrated early and then took it on his self and tried to do too much ... but I love him for it !!

Efford will be a starter.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Maybe I wasn't clear. We should have ran the ball until it didn't work, and not with king. The data shows our run game was tourching them. the QB runs and passes killed all momentumn

I have not counted plays and drives like you have but I had a strong impression by the second half that we were becoming predictable. We ran a lot on first down, usually for little or no gain, and then would pass on second down. It became clear that passing when Clemson knew we were passing was a no win proposition.