Tech vs Clemson, it's actually very easy to explain

[dressedcheeseside]

Scheme beats talent when you execute. TQM had a rough night. We lost. Move on.

“...when you execute.” Why, you figure, could we not execute?

 

[MacDaddy2]

Cumulative first half state from the last three games against Clemson:

First Downs : 41-11

Yards: 870 - 239

Points: 77-13

Hey CPJ, you are playing checkers, they are playing chess. If you want to act like you are the smartest guy in the freaking room, start preparing the team to execute better.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Cumulative first half state from the last three games against Clemson:

First Downs : 41-11

Yards: 870 - 239

Points: 77-13

Hey CPJ, you are playing checkers, they are playing chess. If you want to act like you are the smartest guy in the freaking room, start preparing the team to execute better.

And Mexico would lose a war with America due to poor planning too.

 

[Skeptic]

There is clearly some outscheming going on by Venables.

No question that he is a superior D coordinator and recruiter. All his D linemen are athletes. But: when your interior defenders are mauling -- the police blotter would read criminal assault -- opposing guards and center with remarkable quickness at any size, thus allowing your LBs to skate to the edge, then the QB is going to have a very long evening. Marshall did not play well but Clemson had a lot to do with that. We got mauled by the defending NC who was still seething about Syracuse, playing for a playoff spot, in a Saturday night game in Death Valley ... after a week's layoff. Was there any incentive Clemson didn't have? Face it: they are that much better, maybe more.

 

[Skeptic]

Venables is completely selling out to stop the run and PJ can do absolutely nothing to stop it. The scheme that Venables is running is not new or confusing. What is confusing to me is how PJ refuses to adjust to do anything different. At this point he should install some new package just for Clemson. Playing the same way and getting beat the same way and then just chalking it up to better athletes isn't good enough.

Actually, some of his scheme adjustments to the perimiter blocking are confusing; it's why we frequently saw three GT blockers and two defenders at the edge but one of the defenders running free to the ball. As for "some new package" for Clemson, I gotta tell you I am all in on that one. Now, what?

 

[Skeptic]

“...when you execute.” Why, you figure, could we not execute?

Because the other guy is better throwing breaking pitches off the plate than we are at hitting them. Sorry, wrong event. Same theory though. I wish we had done better. I wanted to do better. But that team lost Watson and is still three QBs deep with another one committed. They were winning matchups in their 3-deep. Really not much else to say.

 

[wvGT11]

Was at the game last night , no doubt the rain played a factor as well as just the overall size and speed of Clemson. I'm still salty and frustrated about being embarrassed on national TV again. We talk up this offense all the time , when it works it's beautiful, when it doesn't it's unwatchable.
Im just wondering now if our program can keep up with the other Acc schools. Clemson, VT, Miami are all real threats and just seem to have gotten stronger over the past 2 years

 

[MacJacket]

A great defense makes any offense look bad. We were just outmanned physically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Longestday]

There was no out scheme.

The team could not block the backside DT, and that was the biggest issue. There were many total misses on the backside DT.

There were several missed reads. You could say the DE out schemed GT by showing a BBack take but going for the QB. The team picked up big yards by giving to the BBack on a "BBack take fake".

GT could not pass block. The DL was doing so well, the DB had no pressure to play the run. There was no out scheme issue here either.

This was about rain and Jimmys and Joes. Rain hurts execution and highlights athletic ability.

 

[4shotB]

This was about rain and Jimmys and Joes. Rain hurts execution and highlights athletic ability.

This is the second game this year in which rain has entered into the post game conversation. When discussing the pro's and con's of our system, we need to add "difficult to execute in inclement weather" into the mix. It's a bit troublesome that we need dry weather to function at full efficiency. WTBS, we could have played them in the real Death Valley and I doubt it would have changed the outcome any. Perhap's Clempson's O would have stepped up their game as well in dry conditions.

 

[okiemon]

In my opinion the OP has it right. For a number of reasons, we do not compete in recruiting with any of the top programs, including at least three of our regular rivals, UGA, VT, and Clemson. I’m sure academics has something to do with it, and so to an even greater extent does money. But we also don’t even go after many of the 4 and 5 stars. We recruit 2s and 3s, and try to coach them up and put them in a scheme that gives us a chance. That’s admirable but also a recipe for 6 and 7 win seasons with a 9 or 10 win season every now and then thanks to a good in-game coach. We make Dave Brain look like a prophet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Longestday]

This is the second game this year in which rain has entered into the post game conversation. When discussing the pro's and con's of our system, we need to add "difficult to execute in inclement weather" into the mix. It's a bit troublesome that we need dry weather to function at full efficiency. WTBS, we could have played them in the real Death Valley and I doubt it would have changed the outcome any. Perhap's Clempson's O would have stepped up their game as well in dry conditions.

Clemson would have improved execution, but they depend on 4 and 5 star talent. GT depends more on execution and less on talent. GT's bump in performance would have been more than Clemson's bump in performance in dry conditions. The game might have looked closer or even a win if GT played lights out and Clemson tried to roll it in...

 

[Animal02]

It has nothing to do with weather, nothing to do with scheme, nothing to do with but one, single solitary thing!

TALENT! Its just that simple.

When your entire D line, LBs and DBs are nationally ranked 4 and 5* players you are going to win 95% of the time. At Tech's best, when everything is clicking they can compete but otherwise Clemson is going to win much more often than not.

Not just talent....but the matchup of that talent. UGA has had far better talent the Tech, I would also say VT, but we match up better than what we have been against Clemson.

 

[Animal02]

How much is scheming vs talent, imo 90% talent. Scheme does not manhandle, talent does

Talent and scheme....but also how their talent matches against ours.

 

[4shotB]

Talent and scheme....but also how their talent matches against ours.

Dabo and staff must recruit defensive talent specifically with GT in mind because they shut us down whereas Bama goes up and down the field against them and lights up the scoreboard.

 

[okiemon]

Dabo and staff must recruit defensive talent specifically with GT in mind because they shut us down whereas Bama goes up and down the field against them and lights up the scoreboard.

That’s the hierarchy: Bama > Clemson > GT. Insert UGA wherever you think they fit.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[65Jacket]

If I had George Soro's money, I would give about $20B to GTAA, and buy off the academic side. We would have a great team!
Seriously, Stansbury needs to get us out of this "play Clemson every year" scheduling situation. It makes our schedule the toughest in the league every year. Clemson, Bama , and Ugag need to form their own "no holes barred" league.

 

[65Jacket]

And another thing, Clemson takes an off week before playing us, and I believe we had mid terms this week. We always suck in any sport on midterm week.

 

[Techster]

Pointed it out during chat...we needed more direct, quick hitting plays. More dives/midlines/QB follows. Instead, we were running counters/triples/etc....more east-west developing plays that gave Clemson's front 7 the time to get off or straight beat our blocks and react to the plays with their speed.

Our best plays were the direct quick hitting plays. Look at all of Kirvonte's runs, MJ's runs (before he got hurt), and the little bit of Howards yards when he was in. It didn't help that Taquan was a deer in headlights last night because no one could block for him to give him time. Taquan's TD run came because Clemson no longer was bringing the house and the back 7 had their backs turned to defend the pass.

 

[wvGT11]

And another thing, Clemson takes an off week before playing us, and I believe we had mid terms this week. We always suck in any sport on midterm week.

I wish we could schedule our bye during midterm week