GTJake
Banned
- Messages
- 2,066
- Location
- Fernandina Beach, Florida
To follow-up on the DRAD comment made by Supersize, I too have Clemson family and friends, one with deep bloodlines, and they too would like to give him back ...
It's so wonderful they took Lawrence to Clemson. Imagine him playing for the dogs..As for Clemson recruiting, they have recently
1. Hit the jackpot on two QB's they recruited from Georgia
2. Filled up the DL pipeline.
#1 makes great WR's want to play there. With a sub par (for them) QB in 2017, they lost to Syracuse, should have lost to NC State, and were blown out by Bama. On #2, they made a great DC hire (remember when WV put 70 on them in the Orange Bowl a few years back), and that made DL's want to play there.
Wouldn't you love to watch the 1999 Friedgen offense go against their 2018 Venables defense?
Fair enough. I just saw a lot of their roster was History of Science and Technology. I still think we can easily compete at their level with this staff, and that starts with keeping in state talent.Looks similar until you read the courses involved.
Does any fanbase like the AD 2 years in? In my not-so-linited experience, the answer is no. The longer they stay, the more they do things that tick some faction of the fans off. The only question is how many factions? When Mbob was finished at Tech he had everybody hopping mad at him, top to bottom. When Drad left, no so much. Same up in Tiggertown, I'd guess.IMO he did nothing for Tech other than add to the coffers and do some rebuilding. At Clemson he has done the same, but whether he has done more, or others have done it for him, and in spite of him is a question best answered by Clemson fans. The two Clemson ST holders that I know have no use for the man. Take that for what it's worth.
On Late Kick Live Ep. 144 discussed the reasons why they believe Ga Tech is college football's biggest sleeping giant, and what it would take to turn the Institute into an ACC title contender yet again.
Link
To follow-up on the DRAD comment made by Supersize, I too have Clemson family and friends, one with deep bloodlines, and they too would like to give him back ...
DRad was at Tech for 6 years. He's been at Clemson for 6+ years. In both cases that's plenty of time to develop legitimate opinions on the man. I disagree that not many were mad at him when he left Tech; I personally know quite a few, and have read comments by even more, who were glad to see him go.Does any fanbase like the AD 2 years in? In my not-so-linited experience, the answer is no. The longer they stay, the more they do things that tick some faction of the fans off. The only question is how many factions? When Mbob was finished at Tech he had everybody hopping mad at him, top to bottom. When Drad left, no so much. Same up in Tiggertown, I'd guess.
I guess the question I would need to know about DRad which I have no idea was how good was he working with the Hill.DRad was at Tech for 6 years. He's been at Clemson for 6+ years. In both cases that's plenty of time to develop legitimate opinions on the man. I disagree that not many were mad at him when he left Tech; I personally know quite a few, and have read comments by even more, who were glad to see him go.
I’m not sure what History, Science and Technology is but I don’t believe they’re splicing genes, doing brain surgery or developing new rockets.Stanford is not a STEM school. We are like CalTech, MIT, and Carnegie Melon. Which one is different? Stanford has said literally that they treat their athletes like special needs students.
That is not to say we can't beat Clemson or be a great team. Hell, Paul Johnson beat Clemson FIVE TIMES, on inferior talent, budget, facilities, etc.
It's so wonderful they took Lawrence to Clemson. Imagine him playing for the dogs..
I would like to know what we built that put us in 220,000,000 in debt as the school endowment has increased iirc by 4-500,000,000.?DRad was at Tech for 6 years. He's been at Clemson for 6+ years. In both cases that's plenty of time to develop legitimate opinions on the man. I disagree that not many were mad at him when he left Tech; I personally know quite a few, and have read comments by even more, who were glad to see him go.
I would like to know what we built that put us in 220,000,000 in debt as the school endowment has increased iirc by 4-500,000,000.?
Also why are we on interest only payments.
Stanford is not a STEM school. We are like CalTech, MIT, and Carnegie Melon. Which one is different? Stanford has said literally that they treat their athletes like special needs students.
That is not to say we can't beat Clemson or be a great team. Hell, Paul Johnson beat Clemson FIVE TIMES, on inferior talent, budget, facilities, etc.
Please don't start this " But STEM" **** again. This narrative sailed already, it's an excuse. It's wood.
Sorry, but the important part about Clemson's rise was Swinney. It was an incredible hire by Terry Don Phillips, the AD, who picked a position coach over a coordinator as interim coach (though recommended by Bowden) because he attended all the practices and watched Swinney coach his receivers, starters through walk-ons, with the same intensity and attention, and capped it by watching the players from all position groups gravitate to Swinney in the locker room. And then it was Phillips and Radakovich who were smart enough to stay out of his way while he built the program his way and served as more than adequate buffers. Let's not forget it was Swinney who fired Steele as DC, and Swinney who hired Venables, spurred by Steele's opposition to his up-tempo offense and Venables' enthusiastic endorsement of it. The importance of money can't be overlooked, but Swinney has evolved as a generational coach. It is possible to get money. Getting the coach is a tougher nut, and getting another Swinney is, well, highly problematic.Yes we can accomplish this. But the important part about clemsons rise was money. Prior to the venables hire and the ability to pay him a g5 hc a part to be a.c. clemson was good but not great.
If we had the funding and ability to pay assistants across the board as well as a recruiting staff in the 30s we could do something similar. Its always been about resources
It's not freaking wood. Did you go to Ga State? Stanford and Duke are not same as GT!!!
Well, intense, yes. Crazy, no. And he has had major offers. But consider the culture Swinney has installed. He had a kid in HS, great player, another below, supposedly a greater player, everybody winds up at Clemson and both Swinney and Venables get to live out their own dream: to coach their sons on a national championship team. All of this is to say I agree he probably would not be a great HC because that is a completely different animal than a coordinator. Swinney cannot show his face without being deluged with autograph and picture crowds, speaks everywhere to everybody ... and that is a special personality. On top of that, he can coach on the field.It does help to have a good defensive coordinator that is a little ( lot ) crazy and teams are scared to give him a head coaching job. And Clemson does pay him and all the coaches well.
Stanford is not a STEM school. We are like CalTech, MIT, and Carnegie Melon. Which one is different? Stanford has said literally that they treat their athletes like special needs students.
That is not to say we can't beat Clemson or be a great team. Hell, Paul Johnson beat Clemson FIVE TIMES, on inferior talent, budget, facilities, etc.