|
Replies: 26
| visibility 4153
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
Posts: 46515
Joined: 2012
|
TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
Apr 12, 2025, 12:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [42275]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 18887
Joined: 2015
|
My advice to Cade, as if he cares or wants my advice,
6
6
Apr 12, 2025, 12:24 PM
|
|
Prove it on the field. Let them do all the yapping. As Nick would’ve said, this can be rat poison. Go get it Cade! Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [24567]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 16549
Joined: 2024
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
4
Apr 12, 2025, 12:58 PM
|
|
Cool...if he plays like a top 5 QB we will have a great year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62696]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62744
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
2
Apr 12, 2025, 3:40 PM
|
|
Yes but I don't want to see a top 5 QB from Cade, I want to see the top one or two that he is IMO!!! Sure, he had an ify 1st season, but nobody ever said that he was a TL16 twin with the same OL and defense that TL16 had. But he looked almost as good as TL16 in his 2nd season that was about the same as or maybe better than TL16's 3d season.
With the very same OL and Defense that TL16 had, Cade would stack up pretty close to what TL16 was at Clemson, but let's wait and see how Cade does in his 3d season. I think that TL16 had the better offense and defense in his first season that he won the Natty, and I think that Cade will have his best offense and defense in his 3d season than what TL16 had in his 3d season, if so, we should expect a Natty from Cade in his 3d season....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1793]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
2
Apr 12, 2025, 4:48 PM
|
|
I love Cade for Clemson!
TL16 has an absolute cannon for an arm with a quick release.
Cade can be great this year, throwing and running. Awsome is what we need!!!
Go Tigers, Beat LSU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5372]
TigerPulse: 92%
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7902]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
I disagree too
4
4
Apr 12, 2025, 1:04 PM
|
|
He hasn’t shown anywhere NEAR the skill level to be considered the #1 college QB in America… and until he does show it on the field against strong competition, all that is just crazy talk. He has the weapons and the experience. No excuses for Cade this year. He has a great opportunity to get off to a good start in game 1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [40315]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 22697
Joined: 2003
|
WRONG...Go Check The Stats Columbo
1
Apr 12, 2025, 3:05 PM
|
|
He will be the #1 Returning Leader in TDs with a TD to INT ratio of 6.5 to 1. Compared to some seniors in 2024 he would be a top 10-15. Most every QB with stats equal to or better than Cade's 2024 are out of CFB in 2025.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7902]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
What was the best team we beat in 2024?
2
Apr 13, 2025, 1:04 AM
|
|
SMU?
Cade needs to show out against top competition. Against talented defenses. The ACC was a shyatt show in 2024. The only decent team beat the crap out of us at home. And Klubnik has done nothing against a quality team. Hold onto your Heisman delusions if you want. I’ll be your truth teller. Everybody needs one. As I said before, in 2025 he will have the experience and the weapons. No excuses for him now. He MUST step up. Now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5372]
TigerPulse: 92%
38
|
^^^This is my take too^^^***
Apr 13, 2025, 9:17 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2171]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: What was the best team we beat in 2024?
Apr 13, 2025, 2:07 PM
[ in reply to What was the best team we beat in 2024? ] |
|
Cade Klubnik’s Game Stats vs. Texas:
• Completions/Attempts: 26 of 43 
• Passing Yards: 336
• Touchdowns: 3 
• Interceptions: 1
• Sacks Taken: 3 
• Quarterback Rating: 114.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7902]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
And he didnt win
Apr 13, 2025, 5:30 PM
|
|
Blame it all on the defense if you want, but in the end three touchdowns wasn’t enough.
I’m not saying he is or was a bad QB. But those of you who want to say he was elite, or he’s now elite because all the better QBs went to the NFL after last season are wishful thinking. HE HASN’T PROVEN IT YET. We sure need him to be that guy, this season. We need him to be that guy in GAME 1. We haven’t had that in many years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5372]
TigerPulse: 92%
38
|
Well we have had the need in the first game with Cade, just didnt get it***
Apr 13, 2025, 5:33 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22195]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
|
Re: I disagree too
Apr 12, 2025, 3:41 PM
[ in reply to I disagree too ] |
|
Yall are seriously delusional in what you think a QB should be. His stats last year were insane and that’s with an awful defense and basically no running game half the year
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7902]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
His stats werent insane
1
Apr 13, 2025, 1:08 AM
|
|
And they were gained against scrub teams. If Clemson is going to transition back to elite in 2025, Klubnik must reach elite QB status. He’s never been anywhere NEAR that yet. I sure hope he makes it. I want to see Clemson beat a good football team again… not just the ACC scrubs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22195]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
|
Re: His stats werent insane
Apr 13, 2025, 11:27 AM
|
|
Yeah you’re low iq
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7902]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
And you got nothing
Apr 13, 2025, 5:35 PM
|
|
Because he ain’t there yet. No excuses this season. He has the weapons, he has running backs, he has an OL that can protect him, and he’s got enough wide receivers who can get open to provide him with ample targets. He needs to beat LSU, SHRED the scrub ACC teams, whip the coots and put us back in the playoff as ACC champions. That’s what we should expect of Cade Klubnik this season. The time is NOW.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62696]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62744
Joined: 2007
|
Re: I disagree too
3
Apr 12, 2025, 4:50 PM
[ in reply to I disagree too ] |
|
Our 1st game won't be a cake walk for Cade Klubnik, but it also won't be a cake walk for Garrett Nussmeier. The one thing that I'm counting on with our season opener is that LSU hasn't seen our defense in part nor full game mode under Tom Allen, and they can't use everything he done with the Penn State defense bc IMO and that is because Penn St and Clemson doesn't have the very same type of defensive talent from one position to the other. I mean if Allen is as good as people says he as a DC, Tom Allen will scheme our defense from player to player talent that we have and not by the talent that he had to work with at Penn St and that alone should give our defense a little bit of an advantage bc of the skill difference from player to player with the Penn defense and the skill difference from player to player with our defense and I'm thinking the two defenses won't look or be the same on August 30th 2025.
That's right, I'm thinking that our defense won't look the same as the Penn St defense did at Penn St, and Allen's defense will look different at Clemson on August 30th. I also believe that Garrett Riley will have some new things installed in our offense that nobody has seen yet either only bc our offense will be loaded with more talent than Garrett has had since becoming our OC. IMHO, if our coaches will have this 2025 Clemson team playing only to the talent that we have without trying to play with trick or gimmick plays, the advantage should be with the paw team, but they will have to stay away from fumbles and dropped balls that should've be caught. Do that, we will be 1-0 when the clock runs out. That is what I honestly believe should be the tale of two pretty good teams competing in our house, plus I hope that the real Death Valley will be finally settled that it's located in Clemson SC, the place where people believe there's something really special in them hills!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [844]
TigerPulse: 95%
23
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
2
Apr 12, 2025, 1:14 PM
|
|
It is up to Cade to take that number one spot! He has the ability to be one of the best QB this year! He has a great WR group , a nice experienced OL, and a good group of RB's.
He just needs to go through his progressions , and be the leader of the Offense and be a team leader! He has the confidence and the ability to lead Clemson to a National Championship.. Just go out and do it!
Go Tigers!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [435]
TigerPulse: 88%
17
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
2
Apr 12, 2025, 2:00 PM
|
|
Why is Arch Manning even in this discussion. He has done absolutely nothing against good teams. He did well against ULM, UTSA and Miss St, but did nothing against GA, Clemson or Penn St. He is not as good as people think. I am from Louisiana originally and have family from around New Orleans. I watched Arch in High School several times. He did nothing against University High School in Baton Rouge or Lafayette Christian. You should look up the comments about him from Lafayette Christian players, they beat him something like 44-17. He would beat up on weak teams and lose to good teams.
Message was edited by: usarmyshreve®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62696]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 62744
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
2
Apr 12, 2025, 4:56 PM
|
|
The only answer is the Manning name made by two NFL QB's that Arch Manning hasn't done anything close to what the other two Manning QBs had done!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2365]
TigerPulse: 97%
32
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
2
Apr 12, 2025, 2:01 PM
|
|
Funny he doesn't talk about the Texas game who had a better defense than Georgia I do believe. The Sellers love just gets to me. He is an average QB. No one was talking about him until the 4th quarter of the Clemson game. You know where he ran up and down the field on a historically bad Clemson rush defense. These guys will pull whatever stat there is to justify their reasoning. It's like political think but with sports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2685]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
1
Apr 12, 2025, 2:51 PM
|
|
At the end of the season then you can put numbers to guys. Until then just do the job to your best ability with no regrets.
As a side comment I just don't believe folks will be talking any positives about Sellers when the dust settles this year.
GO TIGERS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Day Hero [4192]
TigerPulse: 100%
36
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
Apr 12, 2025, 3:31 PM
|
|
Lagway higher? Lmfao what a clown ...he did nothing special last year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [906]
TigerPulse: 97%
24
|
Re: TNET: National analysts disagree on Cade Klubnik's No. 1 spot among QBs
2
Apr 12, 2025, 5:48 PM
|
|
Lagway salvaged Napier’s job and Florida’s season. He is the real deal ( remember Dabo wanted him badly). He’s not top 5 yet but definitely in a top 10 discussion!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14555]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23631
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5372]
TigerPulse: 92%
38
|
How many games did we lose last year that an elite QB would have won?
1
Apr 13, 2025, 9:50 AM
|
|
Miami away — should have won
Louisville at home — should have won
Scar at home — should have won
Texas playoff — could have won
Now 2 losses were against average ACC talent.
The Scar loss was abysmal. No reason whatsoever losing that game!
The Texas loss we could have won if we played from the start of the game like we did later.
Now let’s talk about that SMU game. Why were they even in the game after that first half? ###!
I get that our D was playing too soft and like crap in the second half, but that is no excuse for the offense not scoring! An elite QB wins all the above games and would have scared the crap out of UGA.
So before everyone starts believing Cade is really a Heisman candidate, let’s wait and see him show it on the field first. Thus far I ain’t seen it. I see glimmers of potential, but the proof is still in the pudding for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 26
| visibility 4153
|
|
|
50
