»
Topic: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw
Replies: 62   Last Post: Jun 11, 2014 4:58 PM by: CM Shack
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 62  

Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 4:56 PM
 

Shaws feet killed Clemson Thompson rushed 16 times for 27 yards I like our chance!

2019 white level member

Exactly correct, there is just no way on Earth that

[12]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:02 PM
 

Dylan Thompson could ever beat Clemson.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

"IDIOT POSTER OF THE MONTH SO FAR...GWP-- You have won IPM Award for your failure to completely comprehend a clear post & then choose to attack someone who points out your ignorance. While you are not yet in the same No Class Catagory as deRoberts, ClemTiger117 & Tigerdug23, you are getting closer to the Sewer Dwellers." - coachmac


Especially in Death Valley***

[5]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:03 PM
 




At night.***

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:04 PM
 



2019 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

There's something in these hills.


Re: At night.***

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 6:20 PM
 

With a potential BCS berth like the Sugar Bowl on the line.

Please don't hurt me guys I know we beat LSU and it was a great win but a shot at the Sugar Bowl would have been cool too even though it wasn't guaranteed.


Beating the coots would be better than the sugar bowl, LSU,

[4]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 8:24 PM
 

and the Ohio State wins combined.

2019 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

There's something in these hills.


Re: At night.***


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:24 PM
 

You guys aren't going to be within shouting distance of anything other than the Humiliation Bowl.


Re: At night.***


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 9:27 AM
 

With a 3rd string TB starting in the backfield with him.


Starting right

[1]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:03 PM
 

NOW!!

Literally, right?

smh in advance.

2019 orange level member

"smh?" Please take your erratic and

[3]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:05 PM
 

unfounded use of acronyms back to the Fighting Gamecock Forum which is where you came from coot. Thank you in advance for your compliance.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

"IDIOT POSTER OF THE MONTH SO FAR...GWP-- You have won IPM Award for your failure to completely comprehend a clear post & then choose to attack someone who points out your ignorance. While you are not yet in the same No Class Catagory as deRoberts, ClemTiger117 & Tigerdug23, you are getting closer to the Sewer Dwellers." - coachmac


^^ has me confused with

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:10 PM
 

deadsqualidderpwreck.

2019 orange level member

Or pick a 1st down on 3rd and 18 or 19 yds running the ball***

[1]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:07 PM
 



2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Exactly correct, there is just no way on Earth that


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:23 PM
 

He already DID!!!! Hilarious!


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:02 PM
 

Where are the grammar police when they are needed!! :)


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:03 PM
 

I'm sure you know that in college sacks count against the rushing total.

Those numbers don't encompass the real damage he was able to do in keeping drives alive. It also didn't help that our DBs seemed like they reverted to the Kevin Steele days and wouldn't turn their head to make a play on the ball after it was thrown.


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:03 PM
 

Unfortunately those 27 yards picked up several first downs to sustain drives and tire out our defense, I hope to God we knock him on his ### a few times this year!!!


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw

[1]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 6:30 PM
 

I want Dylan Thompson feeling and looking like Braxton Miller by half time. And by the end of the game, I want him so banged up that he can't play in their bowl game if they get to one. Yep, I would absolutely love for us to beat them twice in one game!!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 7:08 PM
 

Our (D) is so seasoned and loaded this year that it would be a down right shame if we don't continue to bring pain from all sides and directions with this veteran group. Not to mention, the youngbloods(Lawson,Ogundeko,Pagano,etc.) just beginning to taste blood while just starting to grow/(Ling) into their prime. Tigers will be and should be PROWLING all season long, defensively.


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:27 PM
 

I think you mean you want Thompson to look like Taj did the last few years, don't you?


Not sure I've ever been more frustrated than that game


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:06 PM
 

but didn't it get us a new defensive coordinator. Didn't we continue to build a monster D? Are they not going to play again this year? Thompson or not, Clemson regains power in the state in 2014. Here coot coot coot...bok bok!


We said that last year.***


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:08 PM
 



2019 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

There's something in these hills.


Re: We said that last year.***


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 6:32 PM
 

And a good Tiger fan will continue to say it until it happens!!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Not sure I've ever been more frustrated than that game


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:42 PM
 

no, that was two years ago and venables was the dc.


Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game

[1]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:25 PM
 

Clemson would've won easily, even with Shaw's running, if they would've only turned the ball over 3 times instead of 6 this year. Heck, Clemson probably wins by 14 if you just eliminate the two muffed punts.

Shaw's running didn't kill Clemson this year, it just kept South Carolina in the game long enough for Clemson to make another mistake.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:58 PM
 

> Clemson would've won easily, even with Shaw's
> running, if they would've only turned the ball over 3
> times instead of 6 this year. Heck, Clemson probably
> wins by 14 if you just eliminate the two muffed
> punts.
>
> Shaw's running didn't kill Clemson this year, it just
> kept South Carolina in the game long enough for
> Clemson to make another mistake.

Pleas just stop with this crap. It makes us look weak and we're trying to grab for a moral victory. 2 of those turnovers came very late in the 4th and wouldn't have made a difference in the game had they not happened.


Re: Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 6:23 PM
 

Hence his comment about the muffed punts. He didn't exactly say which turnovers, but he did specify those, which absolutely did make a difference.


No moral victory, there


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 8:01 PM
 

The point is that if it's turnovers that beat us this year, not regular play on the field (ie. "Shaw's feet," or "the lines," "third downs," or "Boyd not playing well"). Surely they forced a few mistakes, but nobody would've believed you (including SC fans) if you'd told them Clemson would end up with 6 turnovers, including two muffed punts. And if you showed the stat line to somebody without including the turnovers, they'd wonder how the heck the final score ended up the way it did. That's not any kind of victory, it's an identification of our reason for failure and what needs to be improved. It's also a refutation of the people who wrote things like "South Carolina Dismantles Clemson" (looking at you, Chris Low).

If you just look at the yards per play, you'd see that Clemson held SC to a very low average while Clemson was right about where it was all season. Given that, you really can't argue that anything but turnovers (especially the two muffed punts) made the difference in the game.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: No moral victory, there


Posted: Jun 10, 2014 10:37 PM
 

A couple of things; SC was the better team because they didn't make any mistakes. And they haven't made critical mistakes since 2008.
Also, Spurrier gets very, very conservative when he has the lead(& I believe they had the lead for basically the entire game). The last thing Spurrier cares about is who had the statistical edge. It's actually laughable to even consider.


Re: No moral victory, there


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:19 PM
 

I appreciate the intellectual honesty there. It seems to be a rare commodity around here.


Re: No moral victory, there


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:52 PM
 

When it comes to Clemson's offense a better stat to look at would be the time of possession. Clemson lost because when it comes to the hurry up offense if you can't get the other team off the field quickly you lose momentum. You can talk about the turn overs all day long but the bottom line is when it comes to beating the hurry up offense the strategy doesn't change. Take as much time as you can on offense. Bend don't break on defense.


Re: Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 7:16 PM
 

Amen and Amen again. Clemson killed Clemson. Self inflicked turnovers like those just can't happen in high profile game. Better long when both state rivals are ranked in the top 10 and the world is watching.


Re: Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 8:00 PM
 

> Amen and Amen again. Clemson killed Clemson. Self
> inflicked turnovers like those just can't happen in
> high profile game. Better long when both state rivals
> are ranked in the top 10 and the world is watching.

Good lord. I know most of you aren't the average representative of our fanbase but gosh y'all are embarrassing.


Re: Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 7:18 AM
 

> Clemson would've won easily, even with Shaw's
> running, if they would've only turned the ball over 3
> times instead of 6 this year. Heck, Clemson probably
> wins by 14 if you just eliminate the two muffed
> punts.
>
> Shaw's running didn't kill Clemson this year, it just
> kept South Carolina in the game long enough for
> Clemson to make another mistake.

Shaw didn't play in the 2012 game Thompson did and threw for over 300 yards and 3 TDs at Death Valley.

And it was only 1 muffed punt which was caused by your own player coming too close to your punt returner. The other was stripped by our player.

Way you guys make it sound is that Shaw and Ellington were the only Gamecocks who scored on you. Fact is Ellington didn't have a TD against you last season. Davis, Roland and Wilds did and all are back this year.

Honestly if I was ya'll I wouldn't worry about us till Nov and be more focused on game 1 in Athens.


Re: Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:31 PM
 

But Spurrier's in their heads....


Re: Shaw's feet only really mattered in the 2012 game


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:29 PM
 

if if if.....lol one excuse after another. Five years in a row.


Say what you want

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:52 PM
 

but he's right, Thompson is no Shaw. Shaw was one of those kids that just finds a way to get the job done. As much as I loathe the coots and everything #### related, I will give credit where credit is due. SC will miss him and it will show

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg


Agree on all points...***

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:55 PM
 



2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Say what you want***


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:58 PM
 




Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 6:15 PM
 

And Cole Stoudt is no Tahj Boyd....see how this argument/logic works? Whatever you need to convince yourself that you will win. Same story, different year.


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 6:35 PM
 

Cluck Cluck Cluck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 7:53 PM
 

You are no Tiger ........Go away!!


#### off, coot.***

[2]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 8:23 PM
 



2019 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

There's something in these hills.


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw

[1]
Posted: Jun 9, 2014 9:17 PM
 

I actually think Stoudt could be better for us than Boyd. He won't put up the numbers but we don't need him to.

DT will be starting down a much better defense this year in the Valley. Our secondary was depleted two years ago.

I think we win easy this year.


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 9:56 PM
 

staring


Not sure that I agree that Stoudt will be better for us than


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 9:38 AM
 

Boyd, but IF the running game is effective, the offense overall could be as powerful and maybe a little more so.

The running game HAS to pick up third and two every time it is asked to.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

So you're saying DYLAN THOMAS is no George Bernard SHAW??


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 6:20 PM
 

Oh,......wait a minute.....

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Maybe not, but Cooper Pharroh played QB in high school


Posted: Jun 9, 2014 11:19 PM
 

and was a thorn in our side in our last meeting. Every time they ran the 'wildcat' with him, the D kinda panicked...he was a pretty capable runner and an effective enough passer with Ellington being the speedster WR he threw to. With Ellington gone, maybe things won't go so smoothly...

We will be prepared for Slurrier antics this go 'round.


Re: Maybe not, but Cooper Pharroh played QB in high school


Posted: Jun 10, 2014 6:15 AM
 

Tall_Tiger_Two

Maybe not, but Cooper Pharroh played QB in high school

and was a thorn in our side in our last meeting. Every time they ran the 'wildcat' with him, the D kinda panicked...he was a pretty capable runner and an effective enough passer with Ellington being the speedster WR he threw to. With Ellington gone, maybe things won't go so smoothly...

We will be prepared for Slurrier antics this go 'round.


Where to begin ?
1. PHAROH COOPER
Played as much QB in high school as Stephon Gilmore, and
Shaq Roland did. Pretty much as Wildcat QBs there as well.

2. South Carolina ran about 4-5 plays out of the
wildcat set last year. About the same number of plays
from that formation as they've run each of the previous
years using Bruce Ellington and Stephon Gilmore as the
Wildcat QB.

3. Pharoh threw the TD pass to BRANDON WILDS (who will
be on the team again this year).

4. South Carolina scored a TD from the Wildcat formation
in 2009 that was aided by a long pass play from Gilmore
to Alshon Jeffery. .... I'm guessing if your coaches
haven't gotten "Spurrier's Antics" figured out in half
a decade, then a few months ain't gonna make a whole
lot 'o difference this year.

See you guys in November !


Re: Maybe not, but Cooper Pharroh played QB in high school


Posted: Jun 10, 2014 6:19 AM
 

Y'all are right

Dylan Thompson is no Connor Shaw by a long shot... HOWEVER

Connor Shaw was by no stretch of the imagination a Stephen Garcia.

Different Characters, Different skill sets, Different
styles.... Both Were 2-0 in the rivalry game.


Excuse me...Pheral Cooter, is that better?


Posted: Jun 10, 2014 6:51 PM
 

I'll give you Gilmore, but Roland? says here (http://www.maxpreps.com/athlete/shaq-roland/T2rzEvTuEeKZ5AAmVebBJg/gendersport/football-stats.htm) he threw 2 passes and complete 1 his senior year...not quite the same comparison.

In his senior season, Cooter completed 159-259 passes for 2,885 yards and 24 touchdowns. So don't act like he hasn't had much experience or is no where near the QB your 2 star Thompson is. He's plenty capable with the combination of his feet. You act like Slurrier up and decided to take a gamble and play him at QB on a whim. Cooter is as much a danger at the QB due to his athleticism as was Shaw. To make the freshman all SEC says something about the kids abilities as an all around athlete...Clemson should have been better prepared for this kid, and we will this time around.

With the caliber players we've been recruiting lately, you guys are in for another 63-17ish curb stomping. That'll help erase the streak from your memories... The days of gloating lamecocks will be gone...back to beating the Kentuckys of the world.


Re: Excuse me...Pheral Cooter, is that better?

[1]
Posted: Jun 10, 2014 10:14 PM
 

Everyone knows about the Tigers defensive front 7 being their team strength. Everyone also knows that the Gamecocks are loaded on the offensive line, with a stable of 4 quality running backs and an experienced passing QB. There are some question marks for both teams in the defensive backfield and at wide receiver. Of course, the Gamecocks have a huge question mark with the whole defensive line. The key to Clemson success may be with the running game starting strong. I believe both Stoudt and Thompson are going to surprise a lot of people with quality outings in the first few games. Should be an interesting match-up at the end of November.


Have we converted MCB? Good post...***


Posted: Jun 10, 2014 10:23 PM
 




Re: Excuse me...Pheral Cooter, is that better?


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 6:40 AM
 

Tall_Tiger_Two

I'll give you Gilmore, but Roland? says here (http://www.maxpreps.com/athlete/shaq-roland/T2rzEvTuEeKZ5AAmVebBJg/gendersport/football-stats.htm) he threw 2 passes and complete 1 his senior year...not quite the same comparison.

In his senior season, Cooter completed 159-259 passes for 2,885 yards and 24 touchdowns. So don't act like he hasn't had much experience or is no where near the QB your 2 star Thompson is. He's plenty capable with the combination of his feet. You act like Slurrier up and decided to take a gamble and play him at QB on a whim. Cooter is as much a danger at the QB due to his athleticism as was Shaw. To make the freshman all SEC says something about the kids abilities as an all around athlete...Clemson should have been better prepared for this kid, and we will this time around.

Bruce Ellington was his HS QB. He played other positions
as well, and was listed as "Athlete" coming out of HS.
When He joined the Football team after his freshman Year
on the Basketball team, Spurrier had already decided
to put him at a WR spot, and let him take over the team's
Wildcat package. Last year he made the decision to move
Cooper into that spot as Bruce was our first unit Slot
Receiver, and KO return specialist. It was a way to get
Coop in the field more due to him being a second unit
Slot Receiver behind Bruce. With Cooper becoming our
first unit Slot receiver this coming season, and possibly
our Punt/KO return person, Spurier has already said that
he will more than likely use Terry Googer as the Wildcat
QB this fall. Until Cooper was moved there in the fall
last season, the Wildcat packages in the Spring practices
were being run by Shaq Roland.

With the caliber players we've been recruiting lately, you guys are in for another 63-17ish curb stomping. That'll help erase the streak from your memories... The days of gloating lamecocks will be gone...back to beating the Kentuckys of the world.

It amazes me that Clemson fans think that once they
broke the top 5 in the recruiting rankings, that they
have a magical class that is going to automatically
equate to a dominating team on the field. Simply means
you have a good recruiting class in the making. However,
if you check back a couple of spots, SC is also a top
10 class right now with less recruits committed, and
a few high value targets with SC on their list still
out there. .. Since 2005, SC has finished with ONE
class that outranked Clemson (2009). Clemson has finished
with classes ranking as few as 2 spots between them, and
as much as 19 spots. SC is and will finish with a class
this season within 5-8 spots of the tigers again. As
long as that is the case, it is always going to come
down to coaching and that is why SC is and will continue
their run of double digit win seasons, and have become
the better team in the rivalry game in November. Until
Clemson has SEVERAL classes in a row with gaps of 10-15
or more Spots in the rankings, we are going to end up
with classes pretty much equal in talent and depth. What
small edge you do have will more than be accounted for
by Better coaching. Clemson has a very solid class working
and may end up being their best since the 80s .... but
the margin between your class and where SC is now, still
doesn't give you an advantage Come November. That has
been proven over the last half decade.


Re: Excuse me...Pheral Cooter, is that better?


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:38 PM
 

Other than your usual self delusional tendencies, I don't see how on earth you people can devise a realistic scenario where you beat the Gamecocks this season. We are going to come into Death Valley and ram that ball down your throats when we're not too busy throwing it all over the yard. We are loaded for bear.


Re: Maybe not, but Cooper Pharroh played QB in high school


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:21 PM
 

LOL


Re: Dylan Thompson is no Shaw


Posted: Jun 10, 2014 8:41 PM
 

mindless Coot responses in

3.....2.....1......

military_donation.jpg

References to the 2012 game aside, Thompson's


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 9:21 AM
 

performance against Missouri may be an indicator that you are have good cause to feel optimistic.

Then again, he did look sharp in 2012, at night, in the Valley.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: References to the 2012 game aside, Thompson's

[1]
Posted: Jun 11, 2014 9:23 AM
 

Isnt Dylan Thompson a dead poet ?

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

DB23


Re: References to the 2012 game aside, Thompson's


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 9:29 AM
 

The smell of Coot on a Clemson site is strong. I wish someday for normalcy to return where Coots can again disappear into the hoods of Columbia and the barren wasteland of CFB anonymity . This little streak of success sure has gotten these roaches crawlin' all over the midnight floor...come on Dabo , flip on the switch and scatter them back to their nests.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

DB23


Re: References to the 2012 game aside, Thompson's


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:55 PM
 

Tigerdug23

This little streak of success sure has gotten these roaches crawlin' all over the midnight floor...come on Dabo , flip on the switch and scatter them back to their nests.




I find it amusing when Clemson fans use the term
"THIS / YOUR LITTLE STREAK" ... Georgia had won five
consecutive games in a row vs Clemson until you won
the game last year. To hear Clemson fans talk about it,
they are now as good as any of the Top SEC teams because
they beat LSU, Auburn and UGA in the past three years
ONCE ..... South Carolina has won the last five games in
the Rivalry, and when Clemson fans talk about THE GAME,
it usually includes The Phrase "THAT LITTLE LUCKY STREAK" ! .... LOL


Point for making me Google it. :) ...or a "pint," as I


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 9:43 AM
 

originally typed it, might be more appropriate.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: Point for making me Google it. :) ...or a "pint," as I


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 10:47 AM
 

@CUBuck ,

Coot , Spurrier has built his entire career on not ever being conservative , especially with a lead. Have you ever actually payed attention to this guy or are you just being obstinate for arguments sake ?
Steve Spurrier would never even consider conservative football . Or alcohol consumption , but that is a different cataclysm altogether.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

DB23


do you know what cataclysm means? Because you certainly


Posted: Jun 11, 2014 4:58 PM
 

didn't use it correctly.


Replies: 62  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: CFP National Championship
FOR SALE: Looking for 2 tickets to the Natty in New Orleans. My wife and I have had a hotel reserved for a yea...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
7137 people have read this post