New phone

I started keeping up with Clemson football as a teen. Anytime I watch the spring game and see a backup guy show out I'm immediately reminded of Cullen Harper and Tribble Reese (who??!?).

It was the first spring game I got to attend and thought WOW this Tribble Reese guy killed it. ~~No way he's not the starter...then Cullen Harper took the gig and never looked back.~~

Sure, Cullen Harper isn't a Clemson legend by any means and this was the Tommy Bowden days but it stuck with me that one game/scrimmage doesn't necessarily represent an entire sample size of practice and camp.

Loved what Pearman did today and honestly he gave me the impression he should be #2 on the depth but folks are wildin' out with some of these takes on here.

Edit: Looks like the game I remember was the year before that starting QB battle took place. Tribble Reese balled out but that year it was Harper and him battling for the #2 spot.

https://clemsontigers.com/quarterbacks-highlight-clemson-scrimmage/

Message was edited by: glennjamin182®

Message was edited by: glennjamin182®

DougKingsmoreCrusade

CU Guru [1413]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 661

Joined: 11/4/23

I can't speak for everyone, but

Apr 7, 2024, 2:27 AM

We're not basing this off of one spring game. We're basing this off of the continuously poor performance of Clemson's offense for the past 3 seasons. To give you some idea, here's Clemson's offensive beta rank from last year. This is a ranking system that looks at drive efficiency, explosiveness, play efficiency, and negative drives to produce an overall ranking of college football offenses. Last season, Clemson's offense ranked 76th out of the 133 college football teams in the FBS. In 2022, they were 35th. In 2021, they were 69th. To put things into perspective, here is that same ranking over previous years going all the way back to 2012 when they first created the statistic:

2023: 76th
2022: 35th
2021: 69th
2020: 9th
2019: 5th
2018: 4th
2017: 19th
2016: 2nd
2015: 7th
2014: 72nd
2013: 14th
2012: 6th

By this same statistic last year, Clemson would've ranked 11th out of 14 in the ACC. For some added comparison, they would've been 12th in the SEC. I'm not sure people realize just how bad this offense has been. The 2023 Clemson offense was actually in the bottom half of the entire FBS. As you can see in the rankings, there was some improvement from 2021 to 2022, but 2023 was a massive regression, the worst ranking out of all 12 years listed for Clemson, even worse than the Cole Stoudt year. Now granted, beta rankings aren't perfect, and everyone has their own opinion on how to judge offenses, but they're the best system I've found, and I think if you look at them year-by-year you'll have to admit they're pretty fair if you think back on what some of those teams looked like. (I'll link it here: https://www.sharpcollegefootball.com/offensive-beta-rank )

The reality is, Clemson will never be able to be a great football team with an offense this bad. The great defense helps a lot, but you can't make up for that poor of an offense no matter how good the defense is. We were hoping to see signs of hope during the spring game, but what we got was yet another disappointing offensive performance from Klubnik and Vizzina. What upsets people is that they're realizing that unless the offense can improve, the level of play (and results) from 2021-2023 will be the new normal for Clemson in 2024 and beyond. Optimists have dismissed the spring game as nothing to worry about each of the past 2 years, yet look what happened. Now I'm not saying that the spring game should be looked at as the end-all-be-all of what will happen later, but it can at least offer some clues. And based on what we saw yesterday, the offense looks just as uninspiring as it did last year, save for some good performances by Pearman and a handful of other skill players. But the point is that if Cade doesn't play better, it's not going to matter much how well the receivers play. We were hoping to see some signs of progress for CK2 during the spring game, but he looked pretty much the same as before.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

Whered the new influx of casuals come from?

Re: Whered the new influx of casuals come from?

It's funny

This guy?

Re: This guy?

Little known fact about Tribble...

Name that I haven't seen in a long time....

Re: Whered the new influx of casuals come from?

Myopic/short sighted and definitely a take representative...

I can't speak for everyone, but

TigerBoard POTD