Use your CatCoins™ to grant this post a special award and grant the author bonus CatCoins™!

Love Love Love!
monetization_on 1000
Quality Content
monetization_on 1000
Big Fish
monetization_on 1000
monetization_on 1000
monetization_on 1000
monetization_on 1000
Nom Nom Nom
monetization_on 1000
Ooo, Shiny!
monetization_on 1000
Hear ye, hear ye
monetization_on 1000
monetization_on 1000
monetization_on 500
monetization_on 1000
Take My Coins
monetization_on 1000
Great Idea!
monetization_on 1000
monetization_on 1000

Clemson vs. UNC, common opponent comparison:
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 6  

Clemson vs. UNC, common opponent comparison:

emoji_events [13]
Dec 1, 2015, 10:43 AM

I posted this last night but someone suggested I add in opponents' records so I did:

CU 43, GT 24 (10/10/15)
Rushing yards: CU 201, GT 71
Passing Yards: CU 336, GT 159
Watson: 21/30 for 265, 2 TDs, 1 INT, 6 carries 16 yards
Gallman: 13 carries 115 yards, 2 TDs

UNC 38, GT 31 (10/3/15)
Rushing yards: UNC 182, GT 249
Passing yards: UNC 231, GT 168
Williams: 13/24 for 134 yards, 0 TDs, 0 INTs, 15 carries 148 yards, 2 TDs
Hood: 12 carries 60 yards, 2 TDs

This game is interesting because we played GT a week apart. UNC needed to come from behind to knock off the Bees and allowed WAY more yardage on Defense. Williams didn't throw as much but rushed for a lot more than Watson. He also played longer in the game. Tigers dominated GT from the whistle.

CU 59, Miami 0 (10/24/15)
Rushing yards: CU 416, Miami 53
Passing yards: CU 151, Miami 93
Watson: 15/19 for 143, 1 TD, 0 INTs, 8 carries 98 yards, 1 TD
Gallman: 22 carries 118 yards, 1 TD

UNC 59, Miami 21 (11/14/15)
Rushing yards: UNC 298, Miami 99
Passing yards: UNC 189, Miami 326
Williams: 11/16 for 105, 1 TD, 0 INTs, 12 carries 101 yards, 3 TDs
Hood: 17 carries 132 yards 1 TD

This one is interesting too because the score was pretty close to our final (Miami scored 14 in the 4th quarter and all their points in the 2nd half). They rushed for a TON of yards like Clemson and held them to comparable rushing yardage on D but gave up a lot in the passing game. Granted, Kaaya played the entire game against them but he didn't anything to us when he was in our game. Of course, that's been our most complete game of the year and we haven't been playing like that the last few weeks...

CU 33, Wake 13 (11/21/15)
Rushing yards: CU 171, Wake 39
Passing yards: CU 381, Wake 113
Watson: 24/35 for 343 yards, 3 TDs, 2 INTs, 10 carries for 44, 1 TD
Gallman: DNP, Bryant was leading rusher: 8 carries 58 yards, 0 TDs

UNC 50, Wake 14 (10/17/15)
Rushing yards: UNC 212, Wake 113
Passing yards: UNC 326, Wake 197
Williams: 14/20 for 282 yards, 3 TDs, 2 INTs, 12 carries 59 yards, 1 TD
Hood: 8 carries for 101 yards, 1 TD

Tarholes hold the obvious advantage in this one in terms of scoring disparity. They did give up two first half TDs and were actually losing 0-7 after 1 quarter (scored 29 points in quarter 2). They also gave up a TON more yards to Wake's atrocious offense. Williams and Watson had very similar numbers (both threw 2 picks).

NC St:
CU 56, NC St 41 (10/31/15)
Rushing yards: CU 240, NC St 135
Passing yards: CU 383, NC St 254
Watson: 23/30 for 383, 5 TDs, 0 INTs, 14 carries for 54 yards, 1 TD
Gallman: 31 carries for 172, 1 TD

UNC 45, NC St 34 (11/28/15)
Rushing yards: UNC 374, NC St 308
Passing yards: UNC 179, NC St 206
Williams: 19/30 for 174 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, 10 carries for 53 yards, 0 TDs
Hood: 21 carries for 220, 2 TDs

This was a pretty comparable win as well. Their Defense struggled even more than we did in terms of yardage allowed. Williams wasn't even close to putting on the clinic that Watson did but Hood ran all over them (although Gallman wasn't too shabby either)

And The Coots:
CU 37, Coots 32 (11/28/15)
Rushing yards: CU 236, Coots 181
Passing yards: CU 279, Coots 221
Watson: 20/27 for 279 yards, 1 TD, 0 INTs, 21 carries for 114 yards, 3 TDs, 1 Fumble
Gallman: 19 carries for 102 yards, 0 TDs

UNC 13, Coots 17 (9/3/15)
Rushing yards: UNC 208, Coots 254
Passing yards: UNC 232, Coots 140
Williams: 19/31 for 232, 1 TD, 3 INTs, 10 carries for 9 yards, 0 INTs
Hood: 13 carries for 138, 0 TDs

These games are so far apart there's hardly any reason to read into them but this loss is the only thing standing between the Tarholes and a top 5 ranking right now. It does show us, Larry Fedora is still not a great in-game coach and Williams IS capable of struggling and making bad decisions--and he's returning to the scene of the crime on Saturday!!

Team Rankings:
Scoring Offense:
CU 16th (37 ppg), UNC 9th (41 ppg)

Scoring Defense:
CU 17th (18.8 ppg), UNC 19th (20.8 ppg)

Total Offense:
CU 14th (503 ypg), UNC 16th (496 ypg)

Total Defense:
CU 8th (289 ypg), UNC 70th (395 ypg)

Passing Offense:
CU 23rd (407 ypg), UNC 33rd (338 ypg)

Passing Defense:
CU 4th (160.8 ypg), UNC 19th (186.7 ypg)

Rushing Offense:
CU 25th (214.1 ypg), UNC 18th (229.7 ypg)

Rushing Defense:
CU 24th (127.7 ypg), UNC 107th (208.3 ypg)

The Tarhole Offense is eerily comparable to ours in terms of total yards and scoring (a bit better in ppg). However, their D, while much improved (it's hard not to when you're historically bad in '14) is still vulnerable, particularly in the run game. We're going to have to give them a heavy dose of the Zone Read and the Wayne Train!!

Opponents' Records:
- Wofford (5-6)
- App St (9-2)
- Louisville (7-5)
- #9 ND (10-2)*
- GT (3-9)
- BC (3-9)
- Miami (8-4)
- NC St (7-5)
- #10 FSU (10-2)*
- Syracuse (4-8)
- Wake (3-9)
- Coots (3-9)

Opponents' overall record: 70-72 (.507)

*AP Poll ranking

- Coots (3-9)
- NC A&T (9-2)
- Illinois (5-7)
- Delaware (4-7)
- GT (3-9)
- Wake (3-9)
- UVA (4-8)
- Pitt (8-4)
- Duke (7-5)
- Miami (8-4)
- VT (6-6)
- NC St (7-5)

Overall: 67-75 (.472)

A few thoughts: App State ended up having a decent season after our game. They won't win the conference this year but play one more game on Saturday and could go 10-2 (only losses to us and Sun Belt Conf Champs Ark St). Remember, they've moved up to "FBS." Louisville also ended up being a decent win, especially after they're comeback win over a big, bad SEC team (Kentucky, snicker...), as did Miami (which both of us destroyed--UNC was their only loss after the Clemson game though).

UNC hasn't beaten any ranked teams and they're OOC schedule is terrible--they have played two FCS schools (although NC A&T at least has a decent record) and their Power Five teams have a combined 8 wins (although, to be fair, one was the Coots--they're dragging everyone's SOS down this year). They have played 5 teams in a row with winning records and have beaten them all (OT win vs. VT in Beamer's last home game) so they're playing good football against the toughest part of their schedule.

This one looks like it's going to come down to which version of the Clemson Defense shows up. Will it be the crew that ran roughshod over Miami and everyone in the front half of the schedule or the group that showed up at The Carrier Dome, Carter-Finley, and Williams-Brice?

If it's the latter, we better hope we can win the shootout!


Message was edited by: acevans®

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

How do you give up 250yds passing to GT?***

Dec 1, 2015, 10:45 AM

flag link

I actually had their rushing and passing yards reversed--

Dec 1, 2015, 10:54 AM

thanks for pointing that out.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link

Nice info and analysis. I think the two important things

emoji_events [5]
Dec 1, 2015, 10:55 AM

about UNC's stats are the higher PPG with lower yards/gm, which indicates better punt return (duh) and more turnovers. i.e. more short fields. We have to go 80+ a lot.

And the low PPG against with very high yards/gm. That suggests not giving up big plays and forcing turnovers and fg attempts.

UNC is a not a physically dominant team. they didn't overwhelm Miami anywhere near as much as we did. (Miami is a really stupid team) But they are a big play waiting to happen.

They are very similar to Clemson circa 2011-2012. Lots of talented skill but average LOS play.

2022 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link

Re: Clemson vs. UNC, common opponent comparison:

Dec 1, 2015, 10:58 AM

Good comparison. Total Defense ranked 70th while having two FCS opponents is telling I think. Hopefully the Tigers can grind it out on the ground and keep their "O" off the field. Still a scary match up.

flag link

Re: Clemson vs. UNC, common opponent comparison:

Dec 1, 2015, 11:02 AM

Good stuff!!!! If we hang on to the ball we win!!!

flag link

Re: Clemson vs. UNC, common opponent comparison:

Dec 1, 2015, 11:31 AM

Great analysis, appreciate you posting this.

flag link

Replies: 6  


FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: Football season just around the corner! Selling 4 tickets in section UB for $925 each ($3,700 tota...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
1763 people have read this post