YJMD
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,628
We have pieces that aren't put together yet. The pieces themselves are being developed well. Many are nowhere near as good as we think we will be able to get in the future, but the bigger gain is going to be putting the pieces together well. Against an opponent like Clemson, we probably have too many pieces that are just not good enough to be competitive if they are determined to stomp on the gas like they were Saturday no matter how we put them together. Most of our opponents are not like that. Personally, I think from what I watched that we actually did better on the eye test than prior games.
I know it's an odd statement, but Clemson attacks offensively by pushing your players to the maximum of what they have to do on their assignment. It's not so much that they try to overmatch you one on one. They try to create spots where someone is stuck with an assignment they just can't perform, and if their gameplan is good, they've gotten their coaching up to the point where they usually recognize and execute it to exploit the weak spot. I think we were more disciplined and cohesive in our assignments, but without blitzing the line had no chance of winning their matchup, and we were stuck creating a weak spot for them to find. We had some intermittent success on individual plays, but the talent chasm was just too wide to deny the opportunity for them, and their execution is just too advanced to not get there at least once every set of downs.
Offensively, we are headed there. We were just overmatched talent-wise on the front where we couldn't consistently create the opportunity to advance the ball in the first place. Execution wasn't really worse than we've seen it, but we are far behind Clemson in that regard, and really far being almost everyone in relying on a true freshman. That said, this is the only game where we've faced such a consistent disadvantage. Clearly versus everyone else we've played we matched to athletically well enough to create the opportunity.
I think we'll be better than the first 4 games moving forward. I think the execution is improving. The remaining teams have better matchups, so we'll need better execution to have better results, but we shouldn't expect to be unable to compete at all as consistently as we were vs. the tiggers.
Overall, I think the closer aims are where Dabo started, getting to a consistent winner behind some star players but not consistently overwhelming all but a few teams in the nation athletically.
But I think Clemson under Dabo's start had a much easier group of teams to gain an advantage on.
I know it's an odd statement, but Clemson attacks offensively by pushing your players to the maximum of what they have to do on their assignment. It's not so much that they try to overmatch you one on one. They try to create spots where someone is stuck with an assignment they just can't perform, and if their gameplan is good, they've gotten their coaching up to the point where they usually recognize and execute it to exploit the weak spot. I think we were more disciplined and cohesive in our assignments, but without blitzing the line had no chance of winning their matchup, and we were stuck creating a weak spot for them to find. We had some intermittent success on individual plays, but the talent chasm was just too wide to deny the opportunity for them, and their execution is just too advanced to not get there at least once every set of downs.
Offensively, we are headed there. We were just overmatched talent-wise on the front where we couldn't consistently create the opportunity to advance the ball in the first place. Execution wasn't really worse than we've seen it, but we are far behind Clemson in that regard, and really far being almost everyone in relying on a true freshman. That said, this is the only game where we've faced such a consistent disadvantage. Clearly versus everyone else we've played we matched to athletically well enough to create the opportunity.
I think we'll be better than the first 4 games moving forward. I think the execution is improving. The remaining teams have better matchups, so we'll need better execution to have better results, but we shouldn't expect to be unable to compete at all as consistently as we were vs. the tiggers.
Overall, I think the closer aims are where Dabo started, getting to a consistent winner behind some star players but not consistently overwhelming all but a few teams in the nation athletically.
But I think Clemson under Dabo's start had a much easier group of teams to gain an advantage on.
