|
Replies: 33
| visibility 117
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
Defensive Vs Offensive Team......which is better?
Dec 24, 2012, 7:38 AM
|
|
We all would want a team with a killer offense and a killer defense but we know by history that is a very very rare occurrence among any teams. That combination should win you a national title with ease. But in real world which is better? Would you rather have a killer D and a mediocre but serviceable O or what we have in a killer O and a mediocre D. The latter pretty much describes our team. Which is better? I think the killer O is more exciting for the fans which is why I think so many love Dabo so much...he has brought excitement to Clemson and the fans. But is that good enough? We are about to play a defensive team with a mediocre offense and that should give us all the answers we need. If we win its full steam ahead and keep on keeping on with recruiting. If we lose then imho the whole system should be reevaluated. Either way it should be Nuff said however it turns out.
|
|
|
|
 |
Paw Warrior [4973]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
It's not that easy
Dec 24, 2012, 7:55 AM
|
|
Every offense and defense are different. It is not better or worse to have either. The key is a play caller on either side that can win games for you. Matchups are everything jn sports and just because you have a killer offense doesn't mean anything unless you can adapt when a team is a bad matchup. Same with the defense. One way or the other the key is to find a dynamic guy who can do that for any opponent. Hopefully Morris can be that guy. It has just taken him a few try's to work out the kinks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
Re: It's not that easy
Dec 24, 2012, 7:59 AM
|
|
Im not a Dabo fan but I am a fan of Morris and so wish he was head coach instead of Dabo and reduce Dabo to recruiting coordinator. The only time I have really questioned Morris was his timing with interviews this past few weeks although I understand why he is doing it and more so his game plan against the coots. I was not a happy camper with the play calling in that game to say the least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [65]
TigerPulse: 88%
7
|
Re: It's not that easy
Dec 24, 2012, 8:09 AM
[ in reply to It's not that easy ] |
|
The matchups are important. Clemson vs LSU. LSU is the stronger team at the LOS. We have a ton of speed on offense. Schemes and play calling will be critical. I think that we need faster developing plays to win. Jet sweeps screens, etc. We cant go all out throwing bombs,get the ball out of Boyd's hands quickly and get Ellington quick hitters. Venables will have to have an attacking defense because we cant let them pound us play after play. Our defense will be worn out come 4th quarter ala FSU this year we have to get them in some 3rd and long type distances. I like having a strong offense and defense. You can have both or a strong offense and a good defense. I think if our defense was just close to good we would be 12-0.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
If Morris has a fault
Dec 24, 2012, 8:20 AM
|
|
I think it may be patience. I don't think he is a very patient person and it cost us and him in our last game. There are some games where ball control instead of the fast break offense is more desirable and I think the LSU game is one of those. I hope we come out attacking with long passes to Sammy and Nuk on post patterns...but if that looks like it will not work I sure hope Chad adjust and goes more with the jet sweeps and running game as well as short quick passes which slowly move us down the field while at the same time burn the clock keeping our D off the field. In the coot game he never adjusted and it killed our defense in the 4th. That same scenario is bound to happen again if he doesn't adjust during the peach bowl. Ive watched time and time again how we snap the ball with 10 seconds or more left on the play clock when it was completely unnecessary. In this next game Chad needs to use every single bit of that play clock especially in the second half. I know the premise of our offense is to snap quickly and not let the defense sub players but defenses like LSU are use to that and we will not catch them by surprise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4787]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
i'm not so sure lsu is used to a fast-break offense.
Dec 25, 2012, 5:13 AM
|
|
being in the sec, they face a lot of ground-it and pound-it offenses. 1 or 2 games against a fast paced offense won't get them used to the pace, although the 15 practices will help them.
my biggest concern is that the lay-off between the usuc game and the peach/chick-fil-a bowl game will throw off our timing and cause our offense to miss-fire on more than a couple occasions, and i think the quick,short passing game and running the ball with ellington,boyd,watkins, and the rest of the gang will be crucial for us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [526]
TigerPulse: 97%
19
|
The Players win the game
Dec 24, 2012, 8:03 AM
|
|
The play caller provides the strategy to win the game, but ultimately the outcome depends on how well the players execute the strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [881]
TigerPulse: 100%
23
|
Re: Defensive Vs Offensive Team......which is better?
Dec 24, 2012, 8:04 AM
|
|
Don't think either is inherently better than the other. The key is that you play to your strengths. That said, I prefer the great offense as a fan as it is more fun to watch than 3 yards and a cloud of dust style. It would have been interesting to see how mediocre this d would have been had injuries not decimated the secondary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [4973]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Exactly
Dec 24, 2012, 8:06 AM
|
|
He is capable of beating great defense with his scheme but he really over thought things against scar. What he does and the small adjustments he makes are what makes him great. Hopefully he will get back to that and learn not to take pieces of the foundation away to try to protect yourself from the storm you see coming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7194]
TigerPulse: 70%
42
Posts: 20374
Joined: 2006
|
Re: Defensive Vs Offensive Team......which is better?
Dec 24, 2012, 8:17 AM
|
|
Why can't you have both?
Teams that win multiple NC's,challange for their conference championships on a consistent basis have both.
Granted some yrs the "O" will be better than the "D"( and visa versa),but the elite teams,those that finish top 10 every year,year in,and year out have both.
Offense sells tickets,defense wins championships.
Clemson has no problem selling tickets.But when your "D" can't stop a second string qb from beating you you got issues.Enough said!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [4973]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
No this offenses is built on fast pace
Dec 24, 2012, 8:25 AM
|
|
You slow it down it will look broken. We Ran one of the slowest tempos of the season vs scar. If anything I would like to see it Speed back up.
We can't win a slow it down slug fest. But if we score some points quickly and make them feel like they have to press to keep up we can win going away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
Re: No this offenses is built on fast pace
Dec 24, 2012, 8:29 AM
|
|
I just do not like that philosophy and do not think it will ever lead us to where we want to be on a consistent basis when playing really good teams. I think it works against lesser teams but not so much against good physical teams with great D's. Then again you have to understand I am a Danny Ford type of guy who prefers imposing your will as opposed to running around will...lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [4973]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
If you want to keep Morris you are stuck with it
Dec 24, 2012, 8:42 AM
|
|
I can't say I love the idea of never controlling the clock but there is something I like about the don't think just react way of doing things. The reason this offense doent work when it slows down is players start to over think things. If they don't have time to think what has been drilled into them takes over. Also if you like imposing your will you should love this offense. The reason we win game big is because we force teams into believing it is getting out of reach. We score quick and every play we wear down and demoralize the opposing team. Eventually they crack and change their plan leading to the flood gates opening.
Against scar we were almost there in the second quarter. One more score and things could have easily opened up. We let them bring us back down and dictate the tempo and it hurt us. I know we were leading at halftime but after watching us sputter and not run our offense in the second I knew we missed our biggest chance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19658]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 17994
Joined: 2012
|
Defensive-minded teams seem more consistent
Dec 24, 2012, 9:47 AM
|
|
I think it is somewhat analogous to baseball and pitching v hitting.
In baseball do you spend your money on big hitters or do you invest in your pitching staff? Do you try to overwhelm another staff with your hitting or do you want to shut them down with pitching and defense?
A team can win a lot of games during the regular season with pitching and then run into a hot lineup. And a team can win a lot of games with a bruising lineup only to be shut down in a five game series by a couple of starting pitchers in the zone. So I don't think it is a question of which is better as both can win and lose you games and championships. I think this is especially so with rules changes that are taking the aggression out of the defense.
In general though I still think a football team built around a strong defense is more consistent week to week. The offense, defense, special teams play in unison with the offense focusing on field position and limiting turnovers to set the defense up and vice-versa.
With high-powered offense / weaker defense it seems like the offense does their thing and the defense does their own thing and hopefully it works out.
With all that being said, I'm not calling for the Danny Ford days again. I was in the stands in the late-80's as a student complaining about Fords "Up the middle - up the middle - pass - punt" play calling philosophy. Clemson in general was more consistent but we still lost to the Dukes of the world.
I'm perfectly happy watching a high-tempo spread offense out on the field. And looking forward to seeing what BV does to compliment with his defense. With Chad's offense, the defense will always give up more points than one paired with a traditional offense. The opposing team will have more opportunities if Clemson is scoring in bunches. So to me a 42-28 game these days is the same as a 21-14 back in the Danny days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [18210]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 22449
Joined: 1999
|
I like your baseball analogy. I grew up being a huge fan of
Dec 26, 2012, 9:03 AM
|
|
the Orioles in the '60s. Boog Powell said of that team that if they scored one run, they would win. They had four 20-game winners on the pitching staff and an incredible defense. It was practically impossible to score on them. Swept the Dodgers in '66, beating Sandy Koufax twice.
So, I agree. If your defense is so good that it's extremely difficult for the other team to even score on you, you'll win a lot of games. I agree, also, with the posters who say that kind of football is pretty boring. I played defense in HS, though, and can appreciate a low-scoring game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8447]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
Posts: 10218
Joined: 2003
|
I'll take a shut down D every time.***
Dec 24, 2012, 11:24 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [942]
TigerPulse: 59%
24
|
I agree. It's rare to win the championship without a great
Dec 25, 2012, 2:50 PM
|
|
defense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1103]
TigerPulse: 95%
26
|
Knowledge is a good thing.
Dec 24, 2012, 11:46 AM
|
|
Are you aware that we have been playing without 3 projected starters in the secondary? What has been our weakest link on defense?
Are you aware that the system we ran this year is completely different than the one we ran last year? You do understand there's a learning curve involved in bringing in new systems, correct?
Did you not see any improvement on defense this year? Any at all? I did.
Are you aware that almost 75% of our defensive two-deep is back next year, to grow and further learn the system?
Are you aware that 60% of our two-deep are freshman and sophomores? And several of them saw their first significant playing time?
Have you seen the defensive talent we're bringing in? You think added talent and depth will help the defense overall?
To a man with perspective, it's easy to see the defense is a work in progress. What we saw this year is not the finished product. Clearly.
Only the ignorant would think this is what we should expect next year and beyond. The knowledgeable can see the big picture, which contains many of the things listed above.
As a side note, only soft, weak men, and those who lack knowledge and perspective, they are ones who obsessively seek negatives. Just saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
In most years there is a learning curve
Dec 24, 2012, 1:18 PM
|
|
Unless you have all seniors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1103]
TigerPulse: 95%
26
|
Really? Are you serious??
Dec 25, 2012, 2:26 AM
|
|
Is that your best response? You're kidding, right? Right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
Son you got a serious issue going on
Dec 25, 2012, 3:58 AM
|
|
What part of what I just posted is not correct? "In most years there is a learning curve unless your team has all seniors". Dabo is that you? Guys like you are gonna make excuse after excuse after excuse. Did you get your "Wait till next year" Tshirt for christmas yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1103]
TigerPulse: 95%
26
|
Son. LOL.
Dec 25, 2012, 12:25 PM
|
|
Trying to compare a year to year learning curve, whatever that is, to the learning curve when a brand new coach and system comes in, well, that's pretty darn silly to say the least. A comical reply really. Like I said, is that all you ca come up with?
Are you aware that we have been playing without 3 projected starters in the secondary? What has been our weakest link on defense?
Are you aware that the system we ran this year is completely different than the one we ran last year? You do understand there's a learning curve involved in bringing in new systems, correct?
Did you not see any improvement on defense this year? Any at all? I did.
Are you aware that almost 75% of our defensive two-deep is back next year, to grow and further learn the system?
Are you aware that 60% of our two-deep are freshman and sophomores? And several of them saw their first significant playing time?
Have you seen the defensive talent we're bringing in? You think added talent and depth will help the defense overall?
To a man with perspective, it's easy to see the defense is a work in progress. What we saw this year is not the finished product. Clearly.
Only the ignorant would think this is what we should expect next year and beyond. The knowledgeable can see the big picture, which contains many of the things listed above.
As a side note, only soft, weak men, and those who lack knowledge and perspective, they are ones who obsessively seek negatives. Just saying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [97]
TigerPulse: 93%
10
|
Re: Son. LOL.
Dec 25, 2012, 6:01 PM
|
|
Our defense has been statistically worse this year in most major categories...and we've played a weaker schedule.
You do the math on that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1103]
TigerPulse: 95%
26
|
What?
Dec 26, 2012, 3:24 PM
|
|
The "math" was already listed. You're not making sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
Wow what a list of excuses
Dec 25, 2012, 10:28 PM
[ in reply to Son. LOL. ] |
|
Ive heard fewer at a sales conference from guys who didn't meet their quota. There are always gonna be injuries and there are always gonna be areas where we are young...always. The coots beat us with Lattimore gone for the 2nd year in a row and this time they didn't even have their starting QB playing and they still beat us. With the style offense we are running our D will usually be gassed by the 4th qtr against any team with a good defense (even if we are loaded with 5 stars on D). That of course is just my opinion but I am going by what I have already seen not from just Clemsons team but from others running the up tempo spread where the run game is not utilized. If we end up with the same record next season what will the excuses be then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1103]
TigerPulse: 95%
26
|
LOL again. Every one of the things is a verifiable FACT and
Dec 26, 2012, 3:23 PM
|
|
each and every one of them has absolute impact on the play of our defense.
So you went from not having any response to one that it completely illogical and nonsensical BS. Congrats.
Maybe you should just give up and admit you have no clue what you're talking about? That would make a lot more sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [7]
TigerPulse: 53%
1
|
Re: Defensive Vs Offensive Team......which is better?
Dec 25, 2012, 1:00 PM
|
|
I would rather have a better defense...
If you are too reliant on your offense to carry the team you are a QB having a bad day away from a loss...
I will say it gets old listening to all the clueless LSU fans bemoaning our Offense and the winning ugly all season. So many of them don't understand that the two work together...grind it, physical run off., keep the ball, win field position seldom put your d in a bad position...then let your D dominate.
I am happy with our style of play and I would rather win ugly more often than win pretty and lose more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [57486]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 23582
Joined: 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
Now that is the Tigers that I know and love
Dec 25, 2012, 10:50 PM
|
|
and there cannot be one fan on this board who doesnt wish we would go back to that style of football. That same D would crush this modern team we have right now...no doubt about it. But here is food for thought...even that D of Fords would be gassed by the 4th qtr if he had run the up tempo style offense against a team with a great D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savant [460]
TigerPulse: 51%
18
|
We went 10-2 that year with losses to Duke and GT
Dec 25, 2012, 11:09 PM
[ in reply to This... ] |
|
and we did not win the ACC but we beat the coots and won our bowl game and we had a dominating D. Now can anyone here who was alive then tell me that wasn't much more exciting that year than the team we had this year even with losses to Duke and GT?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [57486]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 23582
Joined: 2011
|
I know I'll take it***
Dec 25, 2012, 11:52 PM
|
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1103]
TigerPulse: 95%
26
|
We didn't win a weak ACC, Duke finished 8-4 and GT finished
Dec 26, 2012, 3:31 PM
[ in reply to We went 10-2 that year with losses to Duke and GT ] |
|
7-4. If Dabo lost to those two teams today, and he didn't win the weak ACC either, then people would want to run him out of town. Some would want to run him out of town even he did win the ACC.
We were ranked 12th at the end of that season. If we win the bowl game we will finish with a better ranking, and this season will be more successful than that one. That's perfectly objective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Legend [13098]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
Posts: 16451
Joined: 2010
|
That was beautiful.***
Dec 26, 2012, 3:41 PM
[ in reply to This... ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Legend [13098]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
Posts: 16451
Joined: 2010
|
Defense***
Dec 26, 2012, 3:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 33
| visibility 117
|
|
|
50
