Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Roy Martin: Clemson - VT Postgame Analysis
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 21
| visibility 1

Roy Martin: Clemson - VT Postgame Analysis


Oct 30, 2006, 11:38 PM

 
Roy Martin: Clemson - VT Postgame Analysis

Losing to a Virginia Tech team who has always played well in Blacksburg on Thursday nights is no reason to throw in the towel. Clemson still has an outside shot of making it to the ACC championship game. Full Story »


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

As always, blunt as hell, but I totally agree. Enjoyable


Oct 31, 2006, 12:04 AM

article!

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous


Oct 31, 2006, 1:16 AM

Admittedly, you can't do much when Proctor can't hit his WRs, but I counted 11 times that we ran the ball on first down. Eleven times, and VT knew it was coming every single time. Even when we got to the 4th quarter, VT knew when we were going to pass (we didn't even try to fool them with Play Action passes), and when we we're going to try to run it again.

There was poor play by the players, but I felt this was the worst coached game of the year. I didn't see much in the way of halftime adjustments, no play action passes, and we essentially gave up with about 5 minutes left in the 4th. I'm not saying the team quit, but punting with less than 5 minutes and down by as much as we were...I think it was an admission that our offense wasn't even going to pull off a fluke hail mary.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Great!!!!***


Oct 31, 2006, 1:31 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous


Oct 31, 2006, 4:36 AM [ in reply to I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous ]

True. We telegraph what we're going to do by the way we line up. I know because I would tell my wife before the ball was snapped "this is run toward the left", "this is a run toward the right", "this is a swing pass to the flat"....No play action whatsoever. I agree if we're running roughshod over teams by running it down their throat, there's no need to shy away from it. But when it didn't work for an entire half, and you're playing a great defense in a hostile environment, you make adjustments. We simply didn't. And if we don't in the future, Va.Tech will not be our last loss. Maryland beat Fla.St., NC State beat BC, and whether we want to admit it or not, the Coots aren't the kind of team this year that we're gonna masacre as in years past (but my fingers are crossed that we do!!). All's certainly not lost. THis is a great team and certainly can overcome this setback, but we can't be complacent and not make adjustments.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Unless we can some production from the QB position....


Oct 31, 2006, 6:29 AM

look for more of the same.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

What good would play action have done in the second half,


Oct 31, 2006, 8:31 AM [ in reply to I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous ]

given our lack of a running game up to that point? Play action only works when you make them respect the run. By the time the 4th qtr rolled around, we were too far out of it for play action to fool them. We got beat, but if you could not look at the schedule and see this one coming, then you were being very overconfident imo. Given our injuries, the lack of an off week to this point, and the short turn around time, Blacksburg was a death pit.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: What good would play action have done in the second half,


Oct 31, 2006, 8:45 AM

I don't think it would have done any good in the 2nd half. By then it was way too late, as you correctly noted, the threat of a run game was gone.

Earlier in the first half, however, when there was still a threat of us having a running game, it might have worked, or at least loosened up the defense a bit.

Total predictability is great as long as you are beating up on the likes of Duke or Temple. Those guys play hard but they are not of the same caliber as VPI.

Not only did we overemphasize the runs on 1st down, but it seemd most of those were inside runs as well. With speedy people like Spiller, what about outside runs? WR sweeps to Stuckey or Ford?

None of that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

VPI's defense is not slow by any standards. They have laid


Oct 31, 2006, 9:08 AM

two eggs this year and had some in house problems, but they seemed to put that aside and were ready to take down a top 10 team, and that they did. Tip our caps and move on.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Yeah Paragraphs ! ! ! !***


Oct 31, 2006, 10:47 AM [ in reply to Re: What good would play action have done in the second half, ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: What good would play action have done in the second half,


Oct 31, 2006, 11:38 AM [ in reply to What good would play action have done in the second half, ]

With VT stacking 8-9 in the box, you might as well try. Personally, I think the run wasn't successful because we didn't make them respect anything else...not that there was anything to respect, but doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.


Re: I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous


Oct 31, 2006, 9:43 AM [ in reply to I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous ]

It could be play calling was due to Spence knowing Proctor was having some trouble that we as fans dont know about!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous


Oct 31, 2006, 9:55 AM [ in reply to I felt some of the play calling was absolutely horrendous ]

I would have to say we did quit in the fourth qtr, players & coaches. What is bothering me about Proctor's performance is that in the first 3 or 4 games of the season, I thought he looked very comfortable passing, patient and checking off to secondary receivers nicely. With only 4 games left, and looking forward to next year, I would have him on a short leash if I were TB.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Roy Martin: Clemson - VT Postgame Analysis


Oct 31, 2006, 8:48 AM

And why did Proctor call a TO before the first offensive play at game's beginning? I am at a loss to understand that need. Further---JD replaces CJ after the latter was pounded on a sideline run; and Proctor had to call a TO---WHY?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"It was the most miserable and disappointing offensive ....


Oct 31, 2006, 10:32 AM

performance of the Tommy Bowden era."
I have seen worse

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Namely ?***


Oct 31, 2006, 10:48 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


30-0? 38-6? 55-15?***


Oct 31, 2006, 12:34 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

GO TIGERS


Thanks..semi shocked that point was even in question***


Oct 31, 2006, 1:10 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Roy Martin: Clemson - VT Postgame Analysis


Oct 31, 2006, 11:24 AM

If Proctor's not the guy, Spence needs to make the change. In sports, there are jockeys and horses. The jockeys have to choose the right horse and control him in order to win. The most talented and fastest horse in the world can not win with a jockey making poor decisions. Many of you like tosay "the coaches don't suit it up." But remember this, the potential of even the most talented player, without proper instruction, is only a possibility, not a probability." That's why coaches loose their jobs based on Ws and Ls.

badge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

..:: ru4god2 ::..


Re: Roy Martin: Clemson - VT Postgame Analysis


Oct 31, 2006, 12:07 PM

I agree. In fact, I was saying during the game they need to yank Procter and put in Harper for at least one series to see if he can be more productive and give a boost to the team. This was evident to me after Procter fumbled on the 30 and then later on threw the interception. In my eyes they should of put in Harper either the series after Procter threw the interception or the one after that. Procter was either over throwing or under throwing recievers all night. Why not take a chance for one series and see if you backup can handle the pressure better because Procter definently wasn't?

The play calling was just as bad as it seemed Spence didn't know how to make adjustments to his game plan. They were stacking the box with 8 or 9 guys and just stuffing the run when we ran behind the tackles all night. What was evident to me on multiple occasions was the fact that the defensive ends were taking the inside route alot. Why not run outside or have Procter fake the handoff and take it on a naked boot as they were not watching him at all. Why not let the TE come off the block and catch the ball behind the LB in the middle as they were constantly coming up to the line to stop the run. Heck, if you don't have a play that you have practiced, you can still through one or two in. After all, how many times do kids in the sandlot design plays in the dirt and then execute them afterwards. Sometimes you have to do things you are uncomfortable at to win the game. I say most of the loss was due to coaching, as it was the coaches who called the plays and didn't change the game plan when it was obvioulsy not working. It was also the coaches who didn't try a new QB when the one in was not getting the job done. On defense it was the coaches who didn't change the game plan when they were running up the gut all night. The players fault on defense was poor tackling.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No choice on 1st down? So it's better to pass on 3rd and


Oct 31, 2006, 11:35 AM

long when the D knows exactly what he will do? Sorry...not only did we need it on 1st, it was insanity to run into 9 in the box when it hadn't worked all night. I'd rather see them try. There would have at least been less pressure for Proctor passing on 1st down than 3rd.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.


Glad you got b@!!s to say it. I'd forgot bout halftime pass***


Oct 31, 2006, 1:39 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 21
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic