|
Replies: 17
| visibility 468
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
Posts: 46528
Joined: 2012
|
TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 8:01 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Heisman Winner [78225]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 120099
Joined: 1998
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 8:04 AM
|
|
I give it aa "C" for clobbering them. Actually on of the most imprssive wins ever against one of the highest ranked tams we have played.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3983]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 9:06 AM
|
|
Never really understood why there is not a separate category for “interceptions after tipped ball” or “tipped interceptions” etc. Those are not all on the QB, IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [42275]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 18888
Joined: 2015
|
Throwing the ball right into a passing lane where a defender is isn’t
Dec 21, 2020, 9:11 AM
|
|
On the qb?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3983]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Throwing the ball right into a passing lane where a defender is isn’t
Dec 21, 2020, 9:32 AM
|
|
QB can do that and the defender misses the ball. Interception was a result after the tip, so just being in the lane does not automatically result in an interception. So yes, a contributing factor, but main disruption to completion was the tip. If we are documenting performance metrics to the nth degree now days, seems fair to QBs to add a “tipped interception” category.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [72]
TigerPulse: 52%
8
|
Re: Throwing the ball right into a passing lane where a defender is isn’t
Dec 21, 2020, 10:02 AM
|
|
I will disagree. QB should not let it get tipped in the first place. Should grounding the ball, or throwing ball away not be counted as an incomplete pass? I think your splitting hairs... if anything add a negative stat for deflected passes... intercepted or not as it means ball wasn't where it should be. Don't get me wrong, Trevor doesn't make those mistakes often, take for example the play where Trevor did pump fake to force defenders arms up then dumped it behind the defender while his hands were up to avoid the deflected pass or sack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3983]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Throwing the ball right into a passing lane where a defender is isn’t
Dec 21, 2020, 11:37 AM
|
|
Actually I was advocating, as you just did, for another category...what you called “negative stat.”
As for splitting hairs, I’ll direct your attention to the discussions now going on during re-play review in general and targeting specifically. In most cases it helps get the call right...but hairs are split.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5486]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 11:06 AM
[ in reply to Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame ] |
|
Tipped/not caught by the receiver should be one thing, especially if the throw was very catchable (not 10' in the air over a guy whose jump reach is 9' 11 3/4"). But tipped by a defender and intercepted seems like that's on the QB (as I think the interception by ND was tipped by defender).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [24]
TigerPulse: 97%
3
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 9:41 AM
|
|
"The overall offensive grade edging the first Notre Dame game by a point" shows just how completely useless these PFF Grades really are. I prefer the articles with the subjective grades of A-, C+, etc. by Offense, Defense, and Special Teams. This is garbage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2394]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Couldn't agree more...
Dec 21, 2020, 9:47 AM
|
|
PFF is pretty nonsensical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6779]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 9:58 AM
[ in reply to Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame ] |
|
Completely agree. They moved it the first three drives and got buggy whipped from there on out. PFF has a great marketing arm selling this crap as some meaningful analysis. We crushed them in the run game and threw pretty much when we wanted. The comparison of grades between the two games tells you all you need to know about it’s uselessness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [269]
TigerPulse: 52%
14
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 9:58 AM
|
|
Do we know why x Thomas was out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [72]
TigerPulse: 52%
8
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 10:45 AM
|
|
All I heard was that it was not injury related.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [151]
TigerPulse: 91%
12
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 10:38 AM
|
|
I don’t profess to understand how the grades are determined. But how does the run defense grade out “slightly worse” than the first game, when there was such a huge differential in the way we shut it down this time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62713]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62756
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2019, 10:36 AM
|
|
Regardless of all else, it is FB, and at least the ND sidelines could have applauded that EJ William's acrobatic sideline catch!!!  By not doing so, it just proves how uptight that bunch of bucknuts truly are!!!! 
Message was edited by: allinallorangeallthetime52®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [151]
TigerPulse: 91%
12
|
Re: TNET: Inside Look: Grading Clemson's win over Notre Dame
Dec 21, 2020, 2:28 PM
|
|
Yeah, at least they were classy about that. If you look at the video of the play, even their sideline didn’t try the usual theatrics of signaling that it wasn’t a catch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20877]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 15322
Joined: 2010
|
Hope to see Parks earn more and more reps ...
Dec 21, 2020, 9:53 PM
|
|
He is doing his part.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playmaker [370]
TigerPulse: 100%
16
|
Re: Hope to see Parks earn more and more reps ...
Dec 22, 2020, 8:09 PM
|
|
.....and next year he’s got DJ’s back. What he does this year is all gravy. Go Tigers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 17
| visibility 468
|
|
|
50
