Replies: 22
| visibility 4
|
Trainer [42]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16
Joined: 9/13/02
|
A quick analysis of Clemson's coaches
Dec 19, 2013, 11:49 AM
|
|
I just did a rough and quick analysis of Clemson coaches performance overall and against USC. I did this because of the vast amount of animosity that I read on these boards toward Coach Swinney and his staff. Do I like losing to USC - no! Do I like and respect Coach Swinney and the rest of the staff - based on what I know - Yes!
These numbers are rough and I may have made a slight error, but they are approximately correct.
Coach Swinney has won 68% of his games. He has only won 16% of his games against the chickens. But over this same period, the chickens have won 71% of their games.
Over the last three years, Coach Swinney has won 79% of his games. He has lost all of the games to USC, but over the same period they have won 84% of their games!
Comparing this to previous Clemson coaches, Tommy Bowden won 63% of his games and 78% of his games against USC, but during this period USC only won 54% of their games. They sucked.
Tommy West won 53% of his games and won 60% of his games against a USC team that over the same period only won 42% of their games. They sucked even more.
Ken Hatfield won 71% of his games and 75% of his games against USC but USC only won 43% of their games during his tenure. Clemson did not do bad while he was the head coach, and I liked him, but that was during my time at Clemson and I don't remember anyone being very happy with him as a coach.
Danny Ford won 77% of his games and 70% of his games against USC. But that was against a USC squad that only managed to win 57% of their games during that period.
I have excluded ties from this analysis.
The thing that this doesn’t take into account is that the coots are not only playing great ball right now, but they are doing so in a conference that is considered to be the strongest from top to bottom in the country. I always remember the SEC being strong, but never do I remember a time when they were considered to be this dominant.
I repeat - I do not like losing to the coots! However, USC is currently playing the best football that they have ever played. Losing to them sucks, but losing to them right now doesn’t bother me as much as it would if they were horrible like they normally are.
I have read a lot of people complaining that our coaching staff should be able to do more with the talent that we have. I will remind them that these same coaches are the recruiters that brought this talent in. Coaches are total package; recruiting, strength and conditioning, preparation, and making calls in the game. I feel really good about our current staff overall. Could they improve? Absolutely! But they are doing a much better job than I could ever do. Like many, I do wish they would focus more on recruiting great linesmen in addition to the skill positions. We have really good linesmen, but I think that we could get 4- and 5- star recruits at those positions. I think that’s what’s needed to transform the Tigers from a great team to a team that is actually in contention for the title at the end of the season.
Now, feel free to call me a pumper.
Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [68858]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115817
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: A quick analysis of Clemson's coaches
Dec 19, 2013, 11:54 AM
|
|
good analysis. I looked back once and discovered coach howard had a losing records against them. I think it was like 14-15 or something like that. But I also think he only had 3 or 4 games agains t them in Clemson. All the others were played in cootville
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [275]
TigerPulse: 77%
Posts: 539
Joined: 9/4/04
|
Re: A quick analysis of Clemson's coaches
Dec 19, 2013, 12:10 PM
|
|
Look at the money that is filtered through SC from the SEC. I live in Alabama and i see the buildings and the money that Alabama and Auburn have. Pull up and do an analysis of how much money SC has now and what they had before they joined the SEC and it will blow your mind. Money makes it easier to win because u can use it to recruit. Im not talkin about paying players, im talking about hiring people to text 24/7 to recruits,, they even have those at Alabama.
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [25]
TigerPulse: 62%
Posts: 88
Joined: 8/31/10
|
Re: A quick analysis of Clemson's coaches
Dec 19, 2013, 12:08 PM
|
|
People need to look back at Bowden era recruiting classes and realize how much better things have gotten.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2784]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1580
Joined: 5/11/04
|
Same ole same ole
Dec 19, 2013, 12:31 PM
|
|
I get it, we can't expect to beat the chickens because they are "really good". I mean, losing 5,6,10 in a row means little because we can still beat WF, NCSU, BC, SCS, El CID, that's murderers row for sure. Let's just all hope the Lamecocks get terrible again so we can finally beat them.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [51592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43092
Joined: 8/10/04
|
What happens when NC State, UVA, Syracuse,
Dec 19, 2013, 12:51 PM
|
|
and BC get really good football teams. We shouldn't expect to beat them should we?
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82113]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47153
Joined: 3/18/07
|
'11 Auburn, '11 FSU, '11 VT (x2), '12 LSU, '13 UGA***
Dec 19, 2013, 1:29 PM
[ in reply to Same ole same ole ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junkie [515]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 397
Joined: 4/27/13
|
Technically '12 Auburn was ranked too
Dec 19, 2013, 3:39 PM
|
|
Though that's a minor detail.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [82113]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47153
Joined: 3/18/07
|
I wasn't listing all ranked opponents we've beaten, but
Dec 19, 2013, 4:03 PM
|
|
yes, '12 AU was ranked at the time. I firmly believe starting out with a loss to us was the catalyst to their horrible season. They were a much better team than their record stated at 3-9, which has become absolutely obvious as essentially the same team is 12-1 right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Junkie [515]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 397
Joined: 4/27/13
|
The OP isn't trying to use that as an excuse
Dec 19, 2013, 3:43 PM
[ in reply to Same ole same ole ] |
|
He's simply showing that you can't expect Dabo to have the same success the other coaches has had. Obviously 16% is inexcusable, but you simply can't expect domination when the other guy is finally playing just as good as you are.
Georgia has beaten Georgia Tech 5 in a row (and it technically should have been much worse than that if 2008's GT didn't pull a miracle). Even still you don't hear people calling for Paul Johnson's head (at least not for THIS reason). Know why? Because Georgia always has a good team and that's just something you can't change.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1310]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 1540
Joined: 9/6/03
|
Great points but some here are too bitter to listen***
Dec 19, 2013, 12:31 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [448]
TigerPulse: 27%
Posts: 843
Joined: 11/14/10
|
Re: A quick analysis of Clemson's coaches
Dec 19, 2013, 12:37 PM
|
|
ESPN Classic is replaying the 2011-12 Orange bowl even as we speak ...check it out and get back with me..
|
|
|
|
|
Junkie [515]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 397
Joined: 4/27/13
|
I'll wait until the 2010 SEC Championship comes on
Dec 19, 2013, 4:05 PM
|
|
Or the 2012 Florida game.
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10391]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14051
Joined: 11/9/04
|
Everyone is aware that we can't beat SCar if they're "good"
Dec 19, 2013, 12:48 PM
|
|
and while i give credit to South Carolina for being a "solid team", BUT........
I saw them play UCF I saw them play Vandy I saw them play UGA I saw them play Kentucky I saw them play UT I saw them play Mississippi State I saw them play a PATHETIC FLORIDA TEAM
they were FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR from the "invincible" unbeatable/best team in the ultraverse that many "clemson fans looking for something to make them feel better" think
they're success and even their "home win streak" can be attributed to the DRASTIC fall off of the SECEast..........it's the SAME as us hanging our hat on having a streak of beating unranked high school teams by double digits.
Look, South Carolina is a "solid" team.......we get it.......we also get that we can't beat a "solid/good" south carolina team, but we SHOULD have won this year, 2012, and 2009 and there's no stats/percentages/angles/views/etc... to change what I've SEEN ON THE FIELD the last 5 years.....there's not...........if nothing else just stop using the "south carolina's good" excuse b/c it holds NO WATER..........ESPECIALLY when we're "supposedly" having the best run we've had in decades
bottomline is spurrier is a better coach than dabo and both know it.........spurrier OWNS him
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9112]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 13833
Joined: 7/1/02
|
Good points - a lot of Clemson fans seem to think....
Dec 19, 2013, 12:49 PM
|
|
we're still playing the creampuff teams South Carolina used to put on the field. Like it or not, we're playing tough teams from them now.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [92009]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 45753
Joined: 10/18/09
|
Hey "sunjester"..I think you need a follower...So here goes!
Dec 19, 2013, 12:53 PM
|
|
GoTiGERS & Coaches...git er done bOYs in OB!
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7347
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Sbrooks...
Dec 19, 2013, 12:52 PM
|
|
I agree that losing to the coots time after time is bad. It's terrible for us fans who live in SC because we have to listen the the chicken shyatt among the year. For the program it hurts recruiting. But objectively, the OP's point is a good one. We aren't losing to them because we are a bad team; we're losing to them because they are vastly improved. And I'm concerned because the way I see it the coots are good but not great. They are very beatable and have been every year. Last year's loss to them at home was a disgrace. No way that should have happened.
I think the multitude of wins over bad competition has puffed up the optimism of our fan base. In my opinion we're better than we were under Bowden, but not that much better. Dabo and staff still have MUCH work to do. I'll be more impressed with consistent results against quality competition. So far Dabo & Co. have been inconsistent at best.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2784]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1580
Joined: 5/11/04
|
You are correct
Dec 19, 2013, 3:35 PM
|
|
My point is that people who validate us losing to the Lamecocks because they are good are ignoring reality. I don't anticipate beating them yearly but five in a row. Dabo is a few steps above Bowden although he is benefitting from a lot of Bowdens work, especially regarding facilities. At some point, the excuses many enspouse don't correlate to the perpetual losses.
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [502]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 644
Joined: 12/10/08
|
Re: A quick analysis of Clemson's coaches
Dec 19, 2013, 1:26 PM
|
|
A long time member with very few posts. The engineer in me loves the data. I also agree with the analysis. I was at Clemson during the Ford era and yes, we lost to USC. We went 1-2-1 over a four year period. They were good and we will lose to good teams as well as beat good teams.
Keep looking for facts.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6937]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 22594
Joined: 5/4/03
|
Re: The heck with your analysis. I am not conceding one
Dec 19, 2013, 1:48 PM
|
|
thing to a Coot.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8464]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3971
Joined: 9/11/08
|
You did the math - Nicely done!
Dec 19, 2013, 2:04 PM
|
|
These are not your Grandaddy's cox. We won't dominate them the way we did. But we will right the ship, and that right soon. And when the coach is gone, things will return even more back to normal, because the appeal to come in there and do something that has never been done won't be there anymore, SEC championship notwithstanding and impossible.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1142]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 2240
Joined: 6/5/12
|
Re: You did the math - Nicely done!
Dec 19, 2013, 3:48 PM
|
|
Never say impossible! Who among us would have thought after 2008 that SC wins the next five? Seriously, very good points by the OP.
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [427]
TigerPulse: 47%
Posts: 1883
Joined: 7/2/04
|
Re: A quick analysis of Clemson's coaches
Dec 19, 2013, 4:41 PM
|
|
I expect this administration and coaches to do what is necessary to regain dominance over the chickens .
|
|
|
|
Replies: 22
| visibility 4
|
|
|