Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [14921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12314
Joined: 3/28/06
|
Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Nov 30, 2015, 10:33 PM
|
|
GT: 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 168 Passing yards: UNC 231, GT 249 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.
Miami: 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...
Wake: 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!!
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!
GO TIGERS!!! BEAT THE TARHOLES!!
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2673]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 545
Joined: 1/3/11
|
Re: Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Nov 30, 2015, 10:39 PM
|
|
Nicely done!
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4974]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 8239
Joined: 12/9/12
|
Re: Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Nov 30, 2015, 10:39 PM
|
|
Good write/read man. Thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [421]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 726
Joined: 9/7/03
|
Great post. Thanks for the information.***
Nov 30, 2015, 10:41 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6654]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 9725
Joined: 9/22/11
|
Outstanding! I see the D coming back strong 43 - 18***
Nov 30, 2015, 11:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [941]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 881
Joined: 8/2/08
|
Yeah, looks obvious
Nov 30, 2015, 11:01 PM
|
|
that we will just give a steady diet of the run game. They are pretty bad at defending the run. That keeps their offense off of the field too.. Thanks for the write up.
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [717]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 824
Joined: 11/16/15
|
Re: Yeah, looks obvious
Nov 30, 2015, 11:04 PM
|
|
If I had to draw up a gameplan, it would involve a lot of rushes. The impact is two-fold, you wear down their defense and force them to maybe stack the box in desperation, and you keep their explosive offense on the sideline.
Now, as long as our guys don't put the ball on the ground, I think we'll be okay Saturday night. Less worried about this than the Coots
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2006]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2736
Joined: 9/23/12
|
Re: Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Nov 30, 2015, 11:02 PM
|
|
How long did Watson stay in that Miami game? They pulled starters after half time it was 45-0
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5014]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2672
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Great work by the OP. Worthy of a spot on Tigernet Home Page
Nov 30, 2015, 11:20 PM
|
|
Deserves a spot this week on the home page , or pinned to the top of the Board. Well done. THX
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [1]
TigerPulse: 23%
Posts: 6
Joined: 11/1/10
|
Re: Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Nov 30, 2015, 11:27 PM
|
|
superb effort and content.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3233]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 4960
Joined: 11/3/06
|
Re: Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Nov 30, 2015, 11:44 PM
|
|
The overall strength of record comparison would be interesting as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15909]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7796
Joined: 11/15/09
|
It seems like NC St is a good comparison. I did not watch the game.
Nov 30, 2015, 11:56 PM
|
|
Did NC St make a legit comeback, or was UNC so far ahead that the scire and stats are not relevant? Nice job, tu
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2455]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5725
Joined: 12/27/05
|
It was a legit comeback
Dec 1, 2015, 12:09 AM
|
|
The UNC fans were getting pretty restless. Didn't ever feel like the game was about to go down the crapper, but it could have gone there with one or two breaks. A Wolfpack TD that would have made it a game got called back due to some block in the back or something.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4659]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6063
Joined: 10/20/15
|
Re: Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Dec 1, 2015, 12:09 AM
|
|
Thank you for sharing! Looks like a lot of research went into that. Appreciate it!
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [735]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 269
Joined: 10/28/15
|
Re: Clemson vs. Tarholes, common opponent comparison:
Dec 1, 2015, 10:42 AM
|
|
Top notch post. I agree with those who said we should run the ball. I would expect the UNC defense to place more emphasis on stopping the pass, so opportunities to run should be there. You know Watson is going to get his yardage (pass and run). We just have to protect the ball. UNC will have its share of mistakes so we don't have to be perfect.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9023]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7375
Joined: 4/9/11
|
Good article: Did I read it wrong? It looks like the holes
Dec 1, 2015, 10:54 AM
|
|
gave up a shiite ton of yards to GT and Miami. If so, I think Dijon will be throwing darts.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
|
|