|
Replies: 30
| visibility 1
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 9:34 PM
|
|
So whats going on with our WRs? I mean we were suppose to have a top 3 WR class this year, but it seems Nuke is the only one we got today. Brown, who has made some unbelievable catches this year, seems silent today, and Sammy is clearly not up to form, likely due to lack of experience thus far this season. (hopefully that will correct itself soon) I know Bryant is out, but it just seems that Hopkins seems to be carrying the weight this year. He is great but he can't do it alone. Our Offense needs to kick it up a gear.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [58444]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46333
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Dang - Peake and Humphries both had some good catches, and
Oct 6, 2012, 9:37 PM
|
|
Sammy, who is still not 100% had 6. And what's wrong with going to Nuk a lot - he's getting it done. No problem here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4483]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5995
Joined: 8/11/08
|
Let's not forget "Mr reliable" Humphries , Kid is good***
Oct 6, 2012, 10:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Member [20]
TigerPulse: 58%
Posts: 75
Joined: 1/31/11
|
Re: Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 9:38 PM
|
|
Wow did you say that last year too? The offense and recievers are fine tajh almost had 400 yds passing and nuk had about 175 of those yards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
Re: Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 9:44 PM
|
|
Jut seemed all the clutch catches were mde by Nuke today. Hardley heard anyone elses name.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1636]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 3163
Joined: 8/21/01
|
Re: Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 9:38 PM
|
|
Every post you've made tonight has been critical of our offense, an offense that put up 601 yards today in an average at best performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
601
Oct 6, 2012, 9:51 PM
|
|
601 yards against who? Bama? FSU? South Carolina? No against lowly GT with on of the worse defenses in the nation. Besides its doesn't matter how many yards you have, it matters how many points. YEs 47 points is good, but there are a lot of teams out there scoring 50 or 60
points. And against good defenses. Our offense was suppose to be among the best. And since our defense can't stop a snail, we need our offense to average 50
+ points a game. I'm not saying we are bad or anything, just not phenominal like we were predicted to be. Rememeber, Middle Tenn State put 49 points on GT. Arn't we expected to be better than Middle Tenn State?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6729]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8298
Joined: 7/23/05
|
I'm pretty sure we are ranked higher than MTSU.
Oct 6, 2012, 9:54 PM
|
|
And we'll likely be ranked just outside the Top 10 after this week. That's pretty good if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
being ranked doesn't help you win games.
Oct 6, 2012, 10:00 PM
|
|
This was our problem last year, when we were ranked 5th and thought the ranking could win games for us. That 5th places ranking soon vansihed when we follow it by going 2-4 over the last 6 games last year. I just don't want a repeat. If we can play better than do it, cause we will be playing better defenses than GT. And the way our D is we need to score all the points we can.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6729]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8298
Joined: 7/23/05
|
Our offense is among the best and we are better than MTSU.
Oct 6, 2012, 10:08 PM
|
|
We have issues on defense for sure...but unlike you, I find little to complain about as far as our offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1636]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 3163
Joined: 8/21/01
|
Re: 601
Oct 6, 2012, 10:05 PM
[ in reply to 601 ] |
|
GT had had 4 turnovers I believe against MTSU. Our offense is fine, our play-calling was a little conservative today. A couple of times we could have maybe fone for it instead of kicked a field goal. If we had done that (and converted) then we score 51-55 points. If GT had of turned it over four times like they did last week, and without the conservative play calling, then we may have been around the 60 point range.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6729]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8298
Joined: 7/23/05
|
400 yds passing...9 different players caught passes...
Oct 6, 2012, 9:40 PM
|
|
I don't see a problem with that....add to it that Sammy is recovering from a pretty bad illness and I think our group of WR's can compete with any teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [734]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 940
Joined: 8/2/05
|
Re: WTH ?
Oct 6, 2012, 9:41 PM
|
|
What team are you watching ? Is this just sarcasm ? Whew, I thought so.
Good grief.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rooter [212]
TigerPulse: 86%
Posts: 413
Joined: 5/5/00
|
Do you even know how this game is played????***
Oct 6, 2012, 9:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
Do you?
Oct 6, 2012, 9:56 PM
|
|
Seems to me we should have put up more than 40-47 points (last TD was in junk time) since Middle Tenn State put 49 on GT. Just saying. And it does seem all the big time catches were made by Nuke. Nothing wrong with that but I think we can be better with all of our guns firing. And we will need those 50+ points a game to survive when we play good teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/16/11
|
Re: Do you?
Oct 6, 2012, 10:00 PM
|
|
again, give it up...how many times did the tigers punt punt??????????????????????????????????????????????
you cray
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
And how many
Oct 6, 2012, 10:04 PM
|
|
times were we in the Red Zone only to settle for 3?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/16/11
|
Re: And how many
Oct 6, 2012, 10:09 PM
|
|
you need to drink some salt water and slap yourself in the face...while you're at it spill a bowl of perfection
I'm beginning to think you're like a lot of Clemson fans, you can't get over the fact that there was gum on your shoe
listen you crackhead, the clemson offense is playing just fine...and the field goal kicker is playing almost unbelieveable
don't break a nail, it will ruin your month
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/16/11
|
Re: Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 9:44 PM
|
|
give it up man...receivers are playing fine
ever thought Nuk is playing so well because D is focusing on Sammy or Ellington or Ford or Tajh
and when Sammy isn't around, Nuk is the best route runner, always gets open
and Nuk and Tajh have the best and longest relationship other than Jaron
seems to me they're usually playing pretty well (the offense)
you should certainly focus your concerns more on the defense
I'm glad to see some guy step up on D (Shuey, Peters, Blanks), but CU D needs to step it up some more
you're frackin' crazy if you think the O is struggling or needs to step it up, just be glad we've got Morris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [166]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 258
Joined: 8/25/12
|
Announcers addressed the Sammy issue before
Oct 6, 2012, 9:46 PM
|
|
the game. Said the coaches told them he wouldn't run but a few plays b/c of all the practice he missed this week due to illness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1900]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 4300
Joined: 10/10/10
|
Its probably just me
Oct 6, 2012, 9:47 PM
|
|
And this doesnt really have anything to do with your point about our WR's not living up to expectations, but I personally think our coaches are not using Sammy to his full capabilities.
Before anyone landblasts me  let me explain my thoughts. It seems like he runs more sweep plays (whethr it be a fake or an actual handoff) than actually going out and running a route as WR. Dont get me wrong, he could definatly take that sweep to the house, but when youve got one of the best WR's in the country who probably runs some of the best routes on the team, he shouldnt be doing plays they could have anyone else running. They seem to be using him more as a decoy instead of letting him go out and do his thing.
Granted he's only really played aboue 2.5 games all year, but thats just how I feel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/16/11
|
Re: Its probably just me
Oct 6, 2012, 9:52 PM
|
|
good point, but you're wrong
when Sammy is being used as a decoy, it's for a reason
when Sammy doesn't catch a deep route, it's because he's being double or triple covered
basically, don't change your offense for Sammy...don't try to fix something that is already working fine...Sammy and Morris both know how to win games, and Sammy also knows he will be fun to watch at the combine
good try but I'm sick of everybody being so crazy about Sammy...good grief, give some of these other guys some credit, PLEASE!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
About Sammy
Oct 6, 2012, 10:03 PM
|
|
I am confused as to why Morris wants to use him like a RB or QB. Just let him go out and do what he does best, catch passes and run like the Flash!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1900]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 4300
Joined: 10/10/10
|
good try? what was I trying?
Oct 6, 2012, 10:10 PM
[ in reply to Re: Its probably just me ] |
|
I even said it had nothing to do with the WR's as a whole. I think Nuk deserves to be in the Heisman talk.
I said I dont think were using Sammy to his full capabilities, which is how I feel.
And im not saying to change the entire offense. We could have Humphries running the sweeps and still have Sammy running routes, which is what he does best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/16/11
|
Re: good try? what was I trying?
Oct 6, 2012, 10:15 PM
|
|
I understand how you feel, and I do not totally agree with it
Sammy runs sweeps because he can break one, and he's a heck of a decoy for that reason
Sammy also runs routes - great routes
I'm not bashing you, lets just give it a few more games, he will get his
I can say I think it's great that there is an argument on which receiver should be getting the catches, considering just a few years ago we had no receivers that could catch
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4483]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5995
Joined: 8/11/08
|
I bet I could write u a $1000 check and you'd b!tch cuz it
Oct 6, 2012, 10:14 PM
|
|
wasn't cash. Dang people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/16/11
|
^^^ haha, I wanted 82 points, no drops & 925 yds O***
Oct 6, 2012, 10:17 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11435]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14500
Joined: 1/2/11
|
Re: Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 10:15 PM
|
|
Dumbest post I have ever seen. 602 yards and you say we didn't have anyone but Nuk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3473]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 5158
Joined: 9/12/10
|
Re: Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 10:19 PM
|
|
I didn't say that at all. I said it seemed like he was doing all the big time catches. The clutch catches. I know others also caught the ball, but it seems like when it really mattered Nuke was the one making the plays. And not sure what 602 years have to do with anything. When you play a high school JV team you should put up 602 yards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 97
Joined: 9/16/11
|
IRONCAT..please explain what needs to change
Oct 6, 2012, 10:25 PM
|
|
to make you happy...
want to spread the wealth more? poor thing
Are you a South Carolina Gamecock fan? a Shaw lover, aren't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [3]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6
Joined: 9/28/12
|
Re: Clemson recievers
Oct 6, 2012, 10:52 PM
|
|
As Well I as I remember two Former Dorman Wide Receivers caught every pass thrown to them today. Cherone Peak and Adam Humpheries more than showed up today and they are in the shadow of Hopkins and Watkins. Give a little credit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 30
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
