Orange Blooded [2537]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3389
Joined: 8/5/13
|
interesting ESecPN article...once ya get past the jabs...
Oct 13, 2015, 5:09 PM
|
|
They just really can't help themselves, but are running out of legit fresh ammo 
Mike Wilson, ESPN Stats & Information
Clemson has lost 11 times in the past five seasons, and no doubt some were convinced No. 12 was going to come Saturday. The Tigers seemed set up for a letdown game, coming off a win over then-No. 6 Notre Dame and facing a Georgia Tech team that had lost its previous three games.
Clemson was due for some “Clemsoning,” in other words.
Clemson coach Dabo Swinney took exception to a question about the topic after the Tigers won Saturday. It shouldn’t be in the conversation, he said.
But should it?
Looking at Clemson’s losses the past five seasons using The Associated Press poll as a measure provides one view of how the team has met -- or not met -- expectations. Looking at the Tigers’ performance using ESPN’s Football Power Index gives a more nuanced look, one that might alter perceptions of whether Clemson has been “Clemsoning” -- a word roughly defined as inexplicably falling on one’s face when the path ahead seems smooth and clear.
Eleven losses since 2011
The first two of Clemson’s 11 losses since the start of 2011 looked bad at the time -- and still do. The Tigers, 8-0 and ranked sixth in the AP poll, lost 31-17 at unranked Georgia Tech on Oct. 29, 2011, and three weeks later, while seventh in the AP rankings, the Tigers lost 37-13 to NC State.
Six other times since the start of 2011, Clemson has lost when ranked higher than its opponent in the AP poll. If one puts stock on the validity of the poll as a gauge of team strength, it’s probably worth noting that of those six losses, one was a No. 12-No. 13 matchup, one was a 6-10, and one was a 3-5.
So even using rankings, those matchups would seem to have portended stiff challenges for Clemson.
Looking at “Clemsoning” from the other side, eight times since the start of 2011, the Tigers have beaten a team ranked higher in the AP poll or a team that was ranked while the Tigers were unranked.
So that’s eight losses to lower-ranked or unranked teams, and eight wins against higher-ranked teams, since 2011.
FPI provides another view
Rather than rely on AP rankings, we can use FPI-based pregame projections to evaluate if Clemson has been inordinately prone to underperforming.
Of Clemson’s 11 losses since the start of 2011, the Tigers were FPI “favorites” -- that is, they had a greater than 50 percent likelihood of winning -- in five. Put another way, six of the Tigers’ 11 losses since the start of 2011 shouldn’t have come as much of a surprise, regardless of polls and rankings.
The Tigers’ reputation for coming up short is probably affected by a couple of high-profile implosions. There was the 51-14 loss to No. 5 Florida State when Clemson was 6-0 and ranked third in 2013, and there was the 70-33 defeat at the hands of West Virginia in the Orange Bowl after the 2011 season.
But Clemson had a 29 percent likelihood of beating Florida State in 2013, so a loss shouldn’t been shocking. FPI viewed the Tigers as slight favorites -- 56 percent likely to win -- against West Virginia in the Orange Bowl.
Since the start of 2011, Clemson is 40-5 (.889) when FPI favorites. Among Power 5 teams with at least 35 games as FPI favorites in that time, the Tigers rank seventh in winning percentage, behind teams that include Michigan State, Florida State and Alabama.
Even sounder lately
Since the start of the 2012 season, the year after Clemson’s implosions against unranked Georgia Tech and NC State, the Tigers have not lost a game in which they had at least a 60 percent likelihood of winning.
They’re 31-0 in such situations. Whatever term is used, that doesn’t seem like having inexplicable letdowns.
|
|
50
