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
Glitz and Glamor VS Power Football
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 29
| visibility 1

Glitz and Glamor VS Power Football


Jan 9, 2013, 2:54 PM

It is quite obvious that in many ways, football is just football, no matter what year or what generation. I think there is no doubt that Clemson, with Tajh coming back will win a bunch of games next year. I think its fair to say we will win 11 or 12 games and maybe even be a serious contender for a national title with our D's improvement.

I think with a flashy offense filled with glamor and some power, along with a decent defense, you can expect to win a national title and have good seasons every so often. The last couple years we have done very well and Clemson has proved they are certainly on the rise.

The question is, can this be sustained and can they win a national title with this type program? I think they can, but only once in a while. Beinf cocnsistent in within the likes of the ACC, is something both FSU and Clemson should always be able to do, but to be consistently good on a national level for a long time, I think you have to take a page from Saban, The Bear and Danny Ford.... and that is POWER football.

Alabama and Danny Fords Clemson and even Harbough's Stanford teams may not have been trully flashy and glamorous but they all had Power. They simply out physicaled you from the word go. They over powered you on both sides of the ball and recrutied to dominate, not compete. I mean sure, a flashy team might sneak in a td from time to time or flash their way to a few awesome plays, but in the end, Power football is king.

Look at LSU, we beat them and proved we can compete with them on any given day but.... who would win if we played 10 times? Id wager LSU 7 out of 10. We had to play a greta game to have a chance and they didnt play all that greta and we still were within one first down of losing. Sure we helped them some but their D had something to do with that.

The point in all this is simple, the teams that have beaten Clemson lately all did something similar, they out physicaled us. They had corners physical enough to put pressure on our receivers and get in their face right at the line. They were just more physical than us. Granted LSU was physical too bu8t sometimes they gave us too much room. I'd argue SC and FSU had a better plan in that regard.

So IMO, I think we will have a greta team next season if our D can repeat its CFA preformance but if Dabo really wants long term success, he needs to add much more power and physicalness to our team. Take a page from the greats and remember, to be great long term, you got to be tougher than the guy in front of you and punch him right in the mouth with a never back down attitude.

And then, we shall be a national, yearly contender.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Give it a rest already - Saban has a team full of 4 and 5


Jan 9, 2013, 3:01 PM

star players - he could win with our offense, GT's offense - the old run and shoot - when you are loaded, you win unless you are just a complete moron (which of course precludes you from this conversation anyway)

For 99% of the college football world the overall depth of talent they have available on both sides of the ball won't allow POWER football as you say to be the answer - scoring and playing sound (not steel curtain) defense is the pathway the majority must take. Danny was great, I love him to this day, but 10-2, other than '81 was what Power football got us, I loved it, but it would not work for us now -

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Water the Point Tree


You are crazy***


Jan 9, 2013, 3:02 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If you think we dont need more dominance on both sides of


Jan 9, 2013, 3:03 PM

then u are the crazy one my friend.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You ignoring what we did to LSU


Jan 9, 2013, 3:16 PM

and how we dominated that game is what's crazy. We lost the turnover battle, lost Sammy after 1 play, and gave up 2 TD drives of 2 plays or less and you think we had to play great to win. The comeback part was great but it was certainly not a great played game by us. All that said we still beat them up physically and dominated everything but the scoreboard(take their 10 TO points away and we did)

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That doesn't preclude the spread offense. I don't think our


Jan 9, 2013, 3:17 PM [ in reply to If you think we dont need more dominance on both sides of ]

offense was the problem this year and Venables WILL get the defense right.

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


You guys are making arguments from nothing....


Jan 9, 2013, 3:30 PM

I never said you couldnt win with a good flashy O. Never said it. I also never stated that our team was not good or that we didnt play well vrs LSU. I am saying you need a power team to sustain long term success. That doesnt mean we go scrap our offense right now but it does mean that we have to be who we are but we need to recruit and play a more physical style of football. We did see a more physical Clemson team in the bowl but LSU was even more phyiscal and has been consistent in that for a long time. Thats what we need to do. Become a more physical team. WE can run the chad offense all day long but we need to be a very physical ball club and recruit to do that very thing.

I think it just comes down to who u recruit and your teams overall attitude. It has to be who you are.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Defense needs to improve and is, OL needs to continue to


Jan 9, 2013, 3:08 PM

improve and be consistent from year to year - other than that - the style of play is right on - the pieces and execution just have to work together.

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Water the Point Tree


If we had not lost the 2 fumbles, the game


Jan 9, 2013, 3:12 PM

Would not have been close!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Thats a silly argument considering


Jan 9, 2013, 3:18 PM

LSU's defense had something to do with those turnovers. LSU made mistakes of their own as well. Adnwe barely won. I thinkwe had to play agreat game to win but Id take LSU 7 out of 10 times until we can become a more phyical team on both sides of the ball. Thats just how I feel. Sure not everyone will agree but thats my feeling.

I never said we didnt play well or we wouldnt be a good tema but the question was long term consistency. I just dont think anything short of being very phyiscal will produce long term success.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We were more physical on both sides of the ball***


Jan 9, 2013, 3:20 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We were more physical than we had been this season but


Jan 9, 2013, 3:23 PM

LSU was the more physical team and I think thats why they can sustain a level of national contention. We need to sustain our physicalness long term but recruiting more plysical players.

I was proud of our D that game but lets face it, I didnt exactly see a dominating D most of the year but from LSU, you saw it most every game.

I hope the full contact practices are really helping mold our team into a more phyiscal style of play.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The biggest difference


Jan 9, 2013, 3:25 PM

Their best players on defense were all those juniors who just declared for the draft. Our best players we Freshman and Sophomores who were in the first year seeing significant time. That's the consistency difference. I for one am shocked at the improvements our young guys made this year.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Which team was ready to play 100 plays? I would say that


Jan 9, 2013, 3:28 PM [ in reply to We were more physical than we had been this season but ]

is the more physical team...

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Conditioning does not equal physicality


Jan 9, 2013, 3:34 PM

just like speed does not equal power. we may have been in better shape but we were not the more physical team

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

So the more "physical" team was rolling around on the ground


Jan 9, 2013, 3:27 PM [ in reply to Thats a silly argument considering ]

trying to slow the action down? Who knew?

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


We played a pretty bad game against LSU, actually


Jan 9, 2013, 3:16 PM

It should have been a butt kicking, but we spotted them 10 points, gave them incredible field position all night, and just generally stunk it up on special teams.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Well, maybe not bad, but average at best


Jan 9, 2013, 3:18 PM

Except for Nuk, and Tajh when we absolutely needed him the most.

But you get the point. We beat LSU without putting together a dominant performance. Just OK as a whole, with maybe a great performance on defense.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We ran it 50 times...That IS power football...***


Jan 9, 2013, 3:25 PM



2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


ok, i get it......no matter what i say


Jan 9, 2013, 3:33 PM

there is always gonna be some comment to offer that we are just fine. I disagree. We have a good team but not a great one and I doubt we can sustain oujr success long term unless we are more physical.

And clearly our team isnt consistantly that. One game is not everygame. We may play UGA and get kick all over the field. We have to be very physical to have a chance in that game. If we dont come with a similar pourpose to the bowl game. We will get killed.

And thats a fact.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If a team wins they are physical, if they don't win they are


Jan 9, 2013, 3:58 PM

not physical. That is how many fans think. The team's overall physicality does not change. We were not using different players against LSU than SCar. If anything we were more physical than Scar's Dline but Clowney and Taylor out finessed us because our Oline couldn't keep them from rushing on the edge. We averaged 6 ypc on the ground in the Scar game. How were we the less physical team? Clowney won his battles with finesse and not power(which is normally the case with him) because he is more athletic than Olinemen.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

This post is a classic example of "Having a theory and


Jan 9, 2013, 3:38 PM

then bending reality to fit it."

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


And you are full of crap. lol seriously, my post was dead


Jan 9, 2013, 3:40 PM

on. and you people clearly cant read and are full of it.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Yeah, that's it... We can't read...Either that or you're


Jan 9, 2013, 3:46 PM

wrong...

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


And THIS response is the classic "Everyone is blind but me."***


Jan 9, 2013, 3:56 PM [ in reply to And you are full of crap. lol seriously, my post was dead ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: Glitz and Glamor VS Power Football


Jan 9, 2013, 3:52 PM

Tajh ran the ball 29 of those 50 rushing attempts. If he does that every game next year he wont hold up. No one could. We need to be able to run the ball well with our rb's. That alone will we mean we are a more physical team. Sooo, I agree with the OP.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

The more physical team ran the ball 50 times and ran 100


Jan 9, 2013, 3:54 PM

plays on offense...Sorry you missed it...If LSU was the more physical team, they would have run it 3 times to end the game up 2...They didn't even try to run it once...Wonder why?

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


They hadn't effectively run the ball all day.


Jan 9, 2013, 4:15 PM

Everybody climbed on Miles for calling the passing plays to end their last series but he made the right calls.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Exactly! They couldn't run... So how could anybody perceive


Jan 9, 2013, 4:31 PM

that LSU was the more physical team? They passed on 3 straight downs with a lead when a first down prolly wins the game...It came down to 2 yards and they were afraid to run it BECAUSE we were the more PHYSICAL team...

2024 white level member flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Our defense was spectacular.


Jan 9, 2013, 4:12 PM

Don't listen to those putz on ESPiN. LSU's defense wasn't anemic. They did well enough to be ranked 8th in the country.

I believe HUNH offense will take over NCAA football. Saban is already crying about it to anyone who will listen. I think Oregon, Clemson and Auburn (as soon as Gus gets it going there) will be at the top of the charts for years to come.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 29
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic