Replies: 42
| visibility 1
|
Addict [449]
TigerPulse: 44%
Posts: 1074
Joined: 7/25/12
|
DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 8:16 AM
|
|
is everyone talking about the defense, our Offense was terrible, and chad morris play calling was terrible
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1153]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 2066
Joined: 3/12/01
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 8:18 AM
|
|
It was bad on both sides of the ball. Our D made Thompson look like an All-American.
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [931]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 1226
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:14 AM
|
|
Seems like that's the pattern with these teams under Dabo. We make everyone's average Joe QB look like a Heisman candidate. The crazy thing is that it's under a different DC and it's still happening.
I don't following recruiting that closely...how are we doing recruiting the defensive side of the ball this year?
MT
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1153]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 2066
Joined: 3/12/01
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:24 AM
|
|
Lots of big targets out there. Then again, we've landed some 4-5 stars already that hasn't helped the D yet
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3233]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 4960
Joined: 11/3/06
|
It was a complete team loss dude
Nov 26, 2012, 8:20 AM
|
|
Couldn't get off of the field on third down, helped them convert a 4th and 10, and missed 3 potential interceptions. I won't even go into the offensive and special teams mistakes.
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [239]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 702
Joined: 10/19/03
|
I agree.
Nov 26, 2012, 8:20 AM
|
|
The 2nd half play calling was dismal.
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [953]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 356
Joined: 1/3/05
|
You watched TV with the first guy??**
Nov 26, 2012, 8:21 AM
|
|
nm
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [953]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 356
Joined: 1/3/05
|
You had the TV on the wrong station and your glasses off***
Nov 26, 2012, 8:20 AM
|
|
nm
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14502]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 22944
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 8:21 AM
|
|
What game did you watch pal. The coots had the ball for 40 freaking minutes
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14009
Joined: 2/19/99
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 8:25 AM
|
|
DE- They do not understand this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [0]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1
Joined: 10/11/07
|
Defense
Nov 26, 2012, 8:23 AM
|
|
Until we have a SEC caliber defense, we stay ok in ACC games, but will never beat quality non ACC teams!
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1799]
TigerPulse: 30%
Posts: 2999
Joined: 4/2/08
|
It was the third and longs that hurt***
Nov 26, 2012, 8:23 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [105574]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44178
Joined: 12/22/08
|
It kills me to agree with amanda, but this time I have to
Nov 26, 2012, 8:31 AM
|
|
Sure, our defense gave up 27 points, which should have been enough for us to win, but it was the time of possession that killed us, which had everything to do with the third and long conversions.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
now, there are some that feel you keep your defense fresh
Nov 26, 2012, 8:52 AM
|
|
late into the game by having an offense that plays keep away. [see south carolina]
we don't have one of those because in both big games we played, our offense wilted, got bich-slapped with all that pretty skill and was told to go sit on the sidelines after we were allowed to go 3 plays and out.
yes, the defense did themselves no favors, but the offense did nothing for the last 3 quarters.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7913]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13703
Joined: 1/8/02
|
BINGO***
Nov 26, 2012, 8:57 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1113]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 1940
Joined: 7/8/99
|
What?!Did we watch the same game? SC knew they could control
Nov 26, 2012, 8:24 AM
|
|
the clock and go for it on 4th with a 50/50 chance or better to get it
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15223]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 18251
Joined: 6/10/09
|
I think most agree with you. 2nd quarter killed us. Had
Nov 26, 2012, 8:25 AM
|
|
2 really short fields. Dominating field position with some great punts. Couldn't do anything.
Should've been up 24 or 28 to 10 at halftime. We lost the game in the 2nd quarter.
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [953]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 356
Joined: 1/3/05
|
Uh, no.
Nov 26, 2012, 8:39 AM
|
|
Saying that we let some opportunities slip in the second qtr on offense, very true, is different than yelling that the defense played well enough to win. That is dead a$$ wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7913]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13703
Joined: 1/8/02
|
both played really bad..the offense couldn't sustain a drive
Nov 26, 2012, 8:40 AM
|
|
over 6 plays after the second quarter which killed a weak/tired defense....they both sucked.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7913]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13703
Joined: 1/8/02
|
both played poorly***
Nov 26, 2012, 8:32 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [22]
TigerPulse: 36%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/29/02
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 8:35 AM
|
|
This loss is much more about the defense. The offense couldn't get on the field long enough to get any momentum going. The D did a good job keeping them out of the end zone, but they couldn't get a stop earlier in drives.
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [858]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 1918
Joined: 12/6/02
|
Defense could not get SC off the field!!!
Nov 26, 2012, 8:45 AM
|
|
Agree, the offense stunk it up big time topping it off with TB's Q4 pick, but the D never gave the O enough chances to score. That Q4 8 minute SC drive absolutely killed us. How many 3rd down conversions did SC have in that drive? SC possessed the ball for a total of 40 minutes and we only ran 53 plays, way below our average per game. Gotta hand it to SC, they kept our O on the sidelines and managed the clock to perfection. We flat out got beat on both sides of the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26360]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15335
Joined: 1/12/00
|
They played bad enough for USuC to keep the ball the whole
Nov 26, 2012, 8:56 AM
|
|
game. How are you getting to this conclusion? 3rd & 19 ring a bell?
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [659]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 2563
Joined: 10/9/07
|
Dude, defense couldn't stop SC on 3rd down. Offense couldn't
Nov 26, 2012, 8:57 AM
|
|
get the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6937]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 22594
Joined: 5/4/03
|
Re:I did not see a very good effort on either side.***
Nov 26, 2012, 9:02 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [1]
TigerPulse: 17%
Posts: 31
Joined: 2/3/09
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:04 AM
|
|
defense could not get off the field. how can offense get going when they cant get on field.
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [449]
TigerPulse: 44%
Posts: 1074
Joined: 7/25/12
|
Our Offense couldnt move the ball on a pee wee league, we ke
Nov 26, 2012, 9:05 AM
|
|
pt trying to hit the deep ball, dropping back in pocket when Boyd had no time to do so
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16207]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13076
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I've been a big critic of the DEFENSE the last few years
Nov 26, 2012, 9:07 AM
|
|
But the OFFENSE really blew it this time around.
|
|
|
|
|
Member [21]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/28/09
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:17 AM
|
|
You are very perceptive. We must get MUCH MORE PHYSICAL on interior line on both sides of the ball to compete at the highest levels. Contractural incentive packages for broken records, top five finishes, etc. doesn't win football games. The teams that win have a balanced attack on offense and can line up and drive the ball down the opponent's throats when needed and/or necessary. (Look at the way Stanford beat Oregon?) The spread is fine but at the end of the day it is still a type or gimmick offense. For instance last Saturday, we just were not good enough or physical enough to line up and control the line of scrimmage when needed. As a result, defeat!! We've got to get a hellofalot more physical to get to where we want and deserve to be.
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [290]
TigerPulse: 83%
Posts: 273
Joined: 1/15/11
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:19 AM
|
|
Letting SCAR have the ball for over 40 minutes of the game isn't playing well enough to win. Our offense needs to have lots of possessions to get in a groove and start throwing up points. We didn't get very many chances to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
Member [21]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/28/09
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:28 AM
|
|
SC had the ball for 40 minutes because the offense was not sufficiently dominant to move the football. Three and out. Three and out. Two and an interception. We need to have the talent and be physical enough that this doesn't happen. It didn't happen all year with out weak schedule but it began to show itself on Saturday night. Face it--we are not a physically imposing football team. Our offense is a spread, gimmick type offense that is a double first cousin to the old run and shoot offense. The good teams ARE ABLE TO LINE UP AND KICK YOUR ###. Unfortunately, we are not one of those teams. Until we develop that culture and mentality, we will continue to be where we are---(we almost made it, we lost by only a few points, and so on and on). Then, fans want to talk about the defense.
|
|
|
|
|
Addict [420]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 1040
Joined: 11/28/10
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:33 AM
|
|
What I thought was Thompson did not have a strong arm at all. The out routes to Sanders stayed in the air for a while. #26 was burnt the whole game and looked lost, any decent defense would have picked off 5 passes with how long the ball stayed in the air.
|
|
|
|
|
Member [21]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/28/09
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 9:51 AM
|
|
You're absolutly correct. You've made my point. We do need help in our defensive secondary. The defense did not lose that game for us. Keep in mind that our defense was on the field for two-thirds of the game.
AT THE END OF THE DAY (OR NIGHT), WE'VE GOT TO GET MUCH MORE PHYSICAL ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BALL. WE MUST BE ABLE TO LINE UP AND RUN THE BALL WHEN OUR FLAIR AND SHARE OFFENSE BREAKS DOWN. WE JUST ARE NOT AS PHYSICAL AS THE UPPER TIER TEAMS IN THE COUNTRY. I'm not interested in contractual offensive records by qbs, wrs, etc. I want to be able to line up and run the football when it is necessary. There were times when SC only had a three man front. Come on!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2196]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4913
Joined: 1/20/03
|
While it was both, Offense deserves the greatest criticism.
Nov 26, 2012, 10:10 AM
|
|
We knew the Defense was bad. The head-scratching, inexplicable 3rd and 19 was unfortunately typical Clemson defense for this year. We've done that stuff all year. Did it last year. Now, we got two VERY bad interference calls that let SCAR keep the ball maybe 5 more minutes. THAT was on the refs. Those plays actually made me proud of our much maligned secondary. I think our defense had more fire than our offense.
A reason why SCAR kept the ball for so long is not just on our defense. Our offense was doing very fast 3 and outs. There was poor play calling. Little fire shown overall. And Tajh had an awful game.
The Offense is our strength. They have a responsibility to remain our strength. The defense did enough to help us win the game. Our offense should have kept the ball longer (don't want to hear that "rhythm" stuff) and SCORED.
Back to the rhythm stuff: If we actually are going to use that as an excuse, then we should never expect to score on our first possession. If being off of the field for so long hurts our rhythm, then we cannot score at the beginning of either half. We aren't in a rhythm yet. If we instead couldn't get in a rhythm because we felt pressure as an offense, well, hey, pressure is part of the game. No excuses. Make your own rhythm, Offense.
And, yes, Clowney is good. So scheme around him. Sammy is good. Ellington is good. Ford is good. Our OL? Much of an OL's success is between the ears. Any other weakness should be coached around by The Chad. Sorry, no excuses.
|
|
|
|
|
Member [21]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/28/09
|
Re: While it was both, Offense deserves the greatest criticism.
Nov 26, 2012, 10:25 AM
|
|
Say what you will. Alhough they made some noticeable mistakes, the defense is not to be solely the blame for this defeat. We must be able to control the ball much more effectively. Our offense could not move the ball on the ground when SC gave a three man front. Geez! Simply put, at this time we cannot compete with the upper tier of the SEC on a contnuous basis. That is where the quality is located presently. Now, having said that, competing week in and week out will enable us to get the point and we will become better over time just as SC has. Playing teams that are less talented than Clemson enables you get fall into that pseudo feeling of "greatness." Sorry, it's not there right now. Until our staff admits it and Coach Swinney forces The Chad to stop worrying about contractural offensive incentives and focus on a toughness that will "also" allow us to run and dominate the line of scrimmage, we'll remain as we are. We'll continue to be a 15-25 ranked football team that is unable to compete in the upper tier of the SEC. If we can compete in the upper tier of the SEC, we can compete with anyone in the country.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2196]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4913
Joined: 1/20/03
|
Uh, I actually did say this was on the offense....***
Nov 26, 2012, 10:30 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Member [21]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/28/09
|
Re: Uh, I actually did say this was on the offense....***
Nov 26, 2012, 10:43 AM
|
|
ugh, u b rite, then!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2293]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 2693
Joined: 8/25/05
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 10:42 AM
|
|
> is everyone talking about the defense, our Offense > was terrible, and chad morris play calling was > terrible
I am wondering the same thing. Defense has always been bad to mediocre...but they definitely stepped it up and held the ##### to a few field goals rather than touchdowns. Thats not saying much but it gave our offense plenty of opportunity to run the score up past the chickens. PLENTY. Way more than what we expected of them. All the offense had to do was score a few. All those weapons and we couldn't do crap. Defense did their job and then some...even if it still sucked.
|
|
|
|
|
Member [21]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/28/09
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 10:52 AM
|
|
I think you're correct. We have slowly moved away from the tough and revered Clemson teams of yesteryear. We've gone to the soft, fast, finese (sp) offense. We don't have the mental and pyshical toughness that we once had as a football team. We are unable to move the ball on the ground when SC gives a 3 man front.
When Coach Swinney played on the NC team at Alabama his senior year, they were boring, boring, boring, boring, boring offensively, but that offense would knock your #### jaws in the dirt. Miami had all the bells, whistles, flashes, etc., but Bama won the game on mental and physical toughness. We just aren't there at this point in time. Until we do, it will be the same results with SC. (I hate to say.)
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1898]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3418
Joined: 11/7/01
|
Look, Sakerlina had the ball for 40
Nov 26, 2012, 11:08 AM
|
|
minutes. That's an entire half and over half of another quarter. We had a good defense?
|
|
|
|
|
Member [21]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/28/09
|
Re: Look, Sakerlina had the ball for 40
Nov 26, 2012, 11:23 AM
|
|
There's enough blame to go around. Having said that, the "on the field time" for the defense was increased by the inability of our "high powered" finese offense to move the #### football. Even when SC was in a three man front, we could not move the ball on the ground. I agree that we need to get more physical on defense as well as our offensive line. Right now, we're very soft and unable to compete on the biggest stage of the game. Sorry to disappoint you, but our offense (especially our ol and blocking backs) MUST become more physically dominant to enhance our total offensive package. Yes, otherwise, you'll see more games where the defense is on the field for fourty minutes (especially with better than average non ACC teams). I know it is not good news, but that's the way it is......
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1898]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3418
Joined: 11/7/01
|
Given the little time we had the ball
Nov 26, 2012, 5:49 PM
|
|
our offense was pretty fair - especially running the ball. That was abandoned and when we went to a passing game, Tajh was chased and hit. His timing went south and he reverted to last year's poor decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [224]
TigerPulse: 77%
Posts: 385
Joined: 10/5/10
|
Re: DEFENSE PLAYED GOOD ENOUGH FOR US TO WIN!! why
Nov 26, 2012, 5:55 PM
|
|
I think our D offered more than I expected them too. They gave the offense opportunities to build drives at least 4 times, not including the interceptions. It falls on both, but the offense definitely played more a factor in this loss. And for the life of me why did we punt with over 4 minutes left and only down by 10????? WHYYY?????????
|
|
|
|
Replies: 42
| visibility 1
|
|
|