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
USC V Clemson by position
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 152
| visibility 51

USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 9:26 AM

Not much going on so let's compare USC V Clemson by position in 2012.
WR-Clemson
OL-USC
QB-push-Taj more experience and better stats but Shaw came on strong v Florida, Clemson and Nebraska
RB-USC
DB-Clemson
LB-USC
DL-USC
kicker-Clemson

Thoughts?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

My thoughts are invalid, since I am a coot.***


Jul 5, 2012, 9:29 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

not particularly invalid, just annoying***


Jul 5, 2012, 9:31 AM



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

No, it's invalid, definitely.***


Jul 5, 2012, 9:32 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

so it's invalid. but you saying that is invalid.


Jul 5, 2012, 9:36 AM

so that makes it simply annoying.

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

Re: No, it's invalid, definitely.***


Jul 5, 2012, 9:37 AM [ in reply to No, it's invalid, definitely.*** ]

Life is definitely invalid as/for a coot.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


The only reason I don't shoot myself


Jul 5, 2012, 9:43 AM

Is I'm scared of guns.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Guns don't kill people.


Jul 5, 2012, 9:44 AM

It's the bullet

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Fiat Justitia et Pereat Mundus


Re: The only reason I don't shoot myself


Jul 5, 2012, 9:49 AM [ in reply to The only reason I don't shoot myself ]

Never be affraid of the gun. Be affraid of the choice the idiot holding it makes. Guns don't kill, people do.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


what about tailpipes?


Jul 13, 2012, 2:53 PM [ in reply to The only reason I don't shoot myself ]

you scared of them? if not, wrap your lips around one. you will be better off

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

So you saying it is invalid


Jul 5, 2012, 9:41 AM [ in reply to No, it's invalid, definitely.*** ]

Is in fact invalid, therefore the validity of anything you say is suspect

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Fiat Justitia et Pereat Mundus


I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 5, 2012, 9:29 AM

offense we run ... flame away

2024 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I absolutely agree.....


Jul 5, 2012, 9:47 AM

and AE isn't recovering from ACL surgery.

I would also take Boyd over Shaw and Clemson's LB's

Both teams will have questions on the OL.




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

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.


I can see SOS working ML like a mule this season.


Jul 5, 2012, 9:50 AM

That many carries in the SEC has to take a toll.

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

Why does it have to be 'in the SEC'... why cant it just be..


Jul 5, 2012, 10:07 AM

that many carries. Being in the SEC is not going to make it any more taxing.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


"Those are SEC carries" Don't you watch ESecPN?


Jul 5, 2012, 10:10 AM

They're training everyone to say there's a difference in the SEC

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

The Dude abides


Depends on the schedule really. If SC were playing


Jul 5, 2012, 10:16 AM [ in reply to Why does it have to be 'in the SEC'... why cant it just be.. ]

LSU & Alabama say back to back, after playing say, Tenn or Florida (who really have no d), it does take its toll.

But the same could be said in any conference or any team depending on how the schedule shapes up.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Depends on the schedule really. If SC were playing


Jul 5, 2012, 12:54 PM

You think Florida has no defense? You are delusional

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Depends on the schedule really. If SC were playing


Jul 5, 2012, 7:00 PM [ in reply to Depends on the schedule really. If SC were playing ]

For what its worth we play UGA, LSU, UF, and Tennessee consecutively in October.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Yeah, running the ball against defenses that...


Jul 5, 2012, 1:16 PM [ in reply to Why does it have to be 'in the SEC'... why cant it just be.. ]

are some of the finest won't make any difference at all. I ain't trying to offend you but if you think there is another conference that has better defensive lines top to bottom just name it.

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

I have personal experience with knee injuries


Jul 13, 2012, 1:46 PM [ in reply to I can see SOS working ML like a mule this season. ]

It doesn't matter how much of a freak athlete you are, once LB and Safties start diving at your knees, you don't cut as hard. Very few pro athletes come back 100% after an ACL tear in one year, it's usually the second year that your mind and you body are right.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 5, 2012, 9:51 AM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

sure agree!!!

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


Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 5, 2012, 9:55 AM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

I also agree. I would take AE above ML in any offense. ML is being used up at a rapid pace. But SC's depth at the position is slightly better.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No he isn't-


Jul 5, 2012, 10:17 AM

Marcus doesn't even scrimmage anymore, - and rarely took more than 10 snaps in practice.

He averaged 20.6 carries his freshman year.

He averaged 24 carries a game last season before the Miss State game in which he was injured.


Hardly numbers that come close to suggesting he's being "used up at a rapid pace"

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Wait A Minute


Jul 5, 2012, 10:24 AM

So a 20% increase in carries per game from his freshman to his sophomre season.

Another 20% increase will put him at 28-29 carries per game.

You lost last year's prime receiver to the draft - Jeffery.

I actually would hate to see him run into the ground, particularly coming off a major knee injury, but time will tell.

badge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 5, 2012, 10:26 AM

As a football fan- when does a 20% increase in carries from one year - automatically mean another 20% increase the next?


Be careful with your answer. There are a lot of stats out there to prove that's illogical to assume.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 5, 2012, 10:29 AM

and for one quick example of how that is illogical - you already named one player where that wasn't close to true.



Alshon Jeffery - his receptions actually went down in big, big numbers time from his 2nd year - to his 3rd- and we actually won more games.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 5, 2012, 10:36 AM

I agree that AJ numbers and production went down, but you still had to account for him on the field. He may have been slow, but he caught almost every ball thrown his way. You will miss him in a big way this year because of that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You have to


Jul 5, 2012, 10:45 AM

account for every wide receiver.


Alshon was double teamed a lot - at the start of last year. But later in the year - when most considered he was having a bad year because his production went down so much- he wasn't being double teamed.


But you are changing the argument.


Country Gentleman was suggesting that since Marcus Lattimore's carries went up 20% from his freshman year to his 2nd year - then we could assume they'd continue to go up.


That's illogical - and Alshon's numbers are one - of many- examples of where it's silly to assume someone's carries (receptions) go up simply because it's one year later.

In football- it depends on a lot of other factors- not simply because a player is one year older.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You have to


Jul 5, 2012, 10:49 AM

I also said - "time will tell" but like you usually do, you tried to make me look illogical.

Illogical is trying to spend all your time on your rival's board expecting to change people's opinions.

badge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


It was


Jul 5, 2012, 10:52 AM

illogical.

You used the 20% increase numbers from his 1st to 2nd year to suggest it may happen again. That doesn't make sense.

In football - a variety of factors are involved.


I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion. I simply showing where that kind of reasoning is off-base.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

But you can ignore the fact that USuC lost their prime...


Jul 5, 2012, 1:22 PM

receiver and more probable than not will run the ball more than last year?

Boy, I stayed out of the fluster cluck as long as I could.

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

And even if his carries don't increase, the main thing that


Jul 5, 2012, 2:43 PM

Should be discussed is whether he can make it throught the season after surgery on two ligaments when many backs are not the same after this surgery. And let's even use the argument of the sec defenses he will have to do it against since it is so often mentioned.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Logically, he should be ale to handle 20-25 carries if he is


Jul 5, 2012, 2:48 PM

The same back

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

agree***


Jul 5, 2012, 10:10 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That's true for any RB- including Andre Ellington since


Jul 5, 2012, 10:09 PM [ in reply to And even if his carries don't increase, the main thing that ]

he's had a major issue with staying healthy over his career.


So that's an issue with every player.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sure it is but latts injuries and rehab is much more serious***


Jul 7, 2012, 2:57 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

not necessarily


Jul 5, 2012, 10:08 PM [ in reply to But you can ignore the fact that USuC lost their prime... ]

it depends.


We lost our "prime receiver" but he didn't have a huge year.


We also have -as a result of the injury to Marcus- a deeper backfield with experience as a result.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 7, 2012, 10:44 PM [ in reply to Re: Wait A Minute ]

> I agree that AJ numbers and production went down, but
> you still had to account for him on the field. He may
> have been slow, but he caught almost every ball
> thrown his way. You will miss him in a big way this
> year because of that.

That's because "halfwit garcia" wasn't just throwing up a wing and a prayer. when aj had to create seperation he couldn't do it. Lazy and out of shape is why his numbers were down. But the coot fans won't ever admit it. That's why he dropped like a rock in the draft.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Garcia was a top pick....


Jul 8, 2012, 10:28 AM

in the CFL! lol.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Stalwart universities—Harvard, Princeton, Yale—most certainly offer status. The Citadel offers character. "


Personally I choose AE because he chose to be a Tiger


Jul 5, 2012, 10:30 AM [ in reply to Re: Wait A Minute ]

and he has a lot of talent. I hope he recovers and has a great year.

However, ML is a special talent and I hope he recovers and has a great year too, because I think he seems like a good kid. But I hope he fails to score against Clemson again :)

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"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


Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 5, 2012, 10:31 AM [ in reply to Re: Wait A Minute ]

Not necessarily, but your options are reduced by losing Jeffery.

I hope Spurrier doesn't put a saddle on Lattimore and ride him.

Although on second thought, if he does overuse him - he'll surely be headed to the NFL draft if he isn't injured again.

badge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 5, 2012, 10:34 AM

Again- that's not necessarily true.

going into last year if someone said on here "I predict Alshon Jeffery won't even have 50 receptions and South Carolina will be better and will win more games" - they'd be laughed off the board considering he had almost 90 receptions in his sophomore year.

But that's exactly what happened.

Assuming in college football is a bad idea.


A top level running back getting 25 carries a game isn't "using up" a runningback or anything close to it.


In fact, it would be pure stupidity to have a top level runningback in a run offense and not give him 25 carries a game.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 5, 2012, 10:39 AM

Not if you have other top level talent to spread it around to. Say, the top receiving tandem in the country... Carries can go way down in that scenario.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

hmmm - what other "top level"


Jul 5, 2012, 10:42 AM

wide receiver did we have last year when Alshon's receptions sunk - but we did better on the field?


I'd like to know his name

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

His receptions went down because he was heavily covered


Jul 5, 2012, 10:46 AM

And Shaw ran around like a deer when NOT giving it to ML or Wilds. Ellington became open when AJ was covered. It wasn't that more receiving options were available that he didn't get receptions.

I think he was referring to our team of how our receptions cna go down when we have several wide receivers to look to

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Clemson


Yes- I think he


Jul 5, 2012, 10:47 AM

was talking about something totally different than I was talking about

Country Gentleman was suggesting that since Marcus Lattimore's carries went up 20% from his freshman year to his 2nd year - then we could assume they'd continue to go up.


That's illogical - and Alshon's numbers are one - of many- examples of where it's silly to assume someone's carries (receptions) go up simply because it's one year later.

In football- it depends on a lot of other factors- not simply because a player is one year older.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I know what you mean


Jul 5, 2012, 10:50 AM

I wouldn't be surprised to see his numbers increase if he's healthy though. Because AJ is gone, that's one less receiver to go to when you don't want to run it. You'd run more often. Maybe since you are deep at RB, you'll rotate out more, but much like when Shaw screwed up early against ECU, Spurrier will put his golden goose out there when things get shakey

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Clemson


well sure


Jul 5, 2012, 10:56 AM

How many times did Clemson fans scream when CJ Spiller wasn't touching the ball enough? Plenty


Any coach worth a rip is going to stick to the hot handed player.

How much grief did Tommy Bowden get from Clemson fans when he didn't stick with the kid back in 2006 or whenever it was that was ramming it down our throats in the last drive- only to be standing on the sideline the last few plays as the drive fizzled (with Clemson fans actually chanting his name for him to be put back out there)



I think reason would suggest- Marcus will be brought back rather slowly unless he's just ligthing it up in practice.


Ever since Marcus arrived in COlumbia, he's not practiced a lot in actual game situations during spring ball or practice - so he can be rested. Last spring practice- he didn't even practice except for about 10% - and never srimmaged more than 3-4 plays. He was resting the entire time.


Then in two seasons he's averaged about 23 carries a game.

That's far from "used up at a rapid pace" or anything of the sort.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

with our quality depth at RB


Jul 8, 2012, 3:04 PM [ in reply to Wait A Minute ]

Lattimore likely won't ave. 15 carries a game. With Carson, Wilds, Miles & Davis available not to mention Shaw running the ball, he'll be lucky to get the ball 15 times.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I will add that I seriously doubt many plays are run to ML's


Jul 5, 2012, 10:28 AM [ in reply to No he isn't- ]

side of the field when he DOESN'T have the ball. No way they risk him getting injured blocking (outside of the backfield) again. That could help defenses, but Spurrier (as much as I dislike the guy) is smart enough to eventually take advantage of a team doing so, and end up scoring on a huge play by going to ML's direction. The way things have been going lately for them, that huge play would probably be a game changer or winning score. Ugh! But, I have to give the bass-tard credit...ha!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: No he isn't-


Jul 5, 2012, 12:51 AM [ in reply to No he isn't- ]

200 carries or less / season is the magic number. RB produciton after 200 carries goes way down. There was some researce on this a couple of years ago featuring Mark Ingram at Alabama.

I also don't think the weight gain that ML had helped him at all. He wasn't nearly as explosive in year 2 and may have contributed to his injury. He doesn't need the extra weight unless he wants a NFL future at FB.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Couldn't disagree more


Jul 5, 2012, 10:50 AM

When an opposing player dives and misses and hits the side of your knee- you are going to hurt your knee regardless if you are 200 or 220.

I think to suggest otherwise is ludicrous.


I don't buy your research or the research you cite.


There are many top level runningbacks in the college football history that did great and did well putting up between 20-and 25 carries a game. It's as obvious as the stat books.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 7, 2012, 7:42 PM [ in reply to Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

Lattimore is a workhorse but AE can hit a homerun from anywhere on the field...AE has the edge in explosiveness

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 5, 2012, 1:04 PM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

I'm not going to flame, I'm just going to adamantly disagree.

How many failed 4th and 1's last year would have been easy 1st downs with a powerful guy like Lattimore? He's just a better back - he'd fit into any system.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I take AE over ML because ACL injuries aren't easy


Jul 5, 2012, 1:11 PM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

I know, everyone is coming back in less that a year, but a majority of those players aren't the same until the second year. The confidence to make hard cuts with LB's diving at your knees takes a little time to return, even if the physical stuff comes back quick.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

LOL. Sorry man, but come on.***


Jul 5, 2012, 2:31 PM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]



2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgringofhonor-jospehg.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


LOL***


Jul 7, 2012, 3:17 PM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 7, 2012, 7:47 PM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

If they're both healthy, I'll take Lattimore. I think AE is great, and think he's probably a Top 10 RB in the nation, but when healthy, Lattimore is arguably #1.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 7, 2012, 10:47 PM

That maybe true, but do you think he will make it through an entire season? I don't, so I'll take AE.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 13, 2012, 3:15 PM

Lattimore has been injured 3 significant times in his career at South Carolina, and not one of them had anything to do with the number of carries he's had. The twisted ankle he suffered in the UK game when the defender tackled him by the ankles and twisted it under the weight of his body had nothing to do with carries. Lattimore was actually hurting UK more in that game as a receiver (already had 100+ receiving yds by halftime) than a rusher, although he had around 70 rushing yds by halftime too. It was very early in the 3rd Qtr, and if it happened on the 1st play of the 1st game of the season, he wouldv'e been injured...

Still, it was only a mild to moderate ankle sprain....Lattimore was kept out of the next game vs Vanderbilt, and tried to even lace up his shoes and enter that game, but was held out.

The next injury was the knock out in the bowl game vs FSU...again nothing having to do with wear and tear of the game. Lattimore only had 1 carry in that game at the time: he caught a pitch out wide, turned around and sized up Reid as if he wanted to go mano a mano with him, when he could have avoided the brunt of the hit easily. Bad choice on his part, obviously....

Then the ACL injury vs MSU. A blindside hit to the back of his knee while he was blocking for a teammate. Again, had nothing to do with how many carries Marcus had in the game, or on the season.

Lattimore is not the type of RB that will get you 10 carries for 35 yds, then bust off a 65 yd run for a TD, and give you 11 carries for 100 yds every game. It's not how he is wired. He's always been a power back up the middle for 5-6 yds, that is near impossible to bring down. He wears out the opposing defenses, not wears out from rushing. He did this while in high school, and will do this when he enters the NFL. But there will be other RBs every year who will have MORE carries than he has, and no one will raise questions about them...

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 8, 2012, 12:02 PM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

In all honesty, I'd rate the RB as a push! Both quality guys and players. Flame away if you like, but I'm no coot! I disagree with the LB, I think CU wins there.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 13, 2012, 1:28 PM [ in reply to I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of ]

I respectfully have to disagree; well, concerning 2011 at least. I think AE is and has been one of the most underrated backs in the country, and I love his quickness and versatility, but last year we needed a lot more pass blocking (see 4 of last 5 games), and ML is a blocking beast! Hopefully we shore up the line for 2012 and my point will be moot!

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 9:29 AM

RB= Push, not sure about latti, and they have nothing behind him. I believe Ellington has better numbers than latti 2 years ago. Heck, I'd wager that Sammy is a better RB than wnything the coots have at this point.

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

RB-who they have behind ML


Jul 5, 2012, 9:58 AM

For starters, a senior who has already twice rushed for over a hundred yards against us,in Kenny Miles. Brandon Wilds who had 3 100+ yard games after ML got hurt. Shon Carson who beat out Miles an d Wilds in preseason before getting hurt aainst UGA. And one of most recruited freshmen rb's in Mike Davis.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: RB-who they have behind ML


Jul 5, 2012, 10:03 AM

Good points. When you consider we have basically nothing to show for at RB in the 09, 10 and 11 classes, when rating positions, I'd give them an edge overall at RB.

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

The Dude abides


Re: RB-who they have behind ML


Jul 5, 2012, 10:05 AM

but I wouldn't give up AE for any of their RBs.

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

The Dude abides


Me either!***


Jul 5, 2012, 10:14 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 12:41 PM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]

They do actually have good/decent backs behind Lattimore if you watched their games. Wilds went over 100 against Tenn. and Miles had good games against us and Nebraska.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 9:34 AM

my thoughts. you are a nut. we are looooooooaded at lb. and how could any clemson fan say tajh and shaw are a push. and the coots lost #### near as many olinemen as we did. i know for a fact coach morris likes this line better than last years already. how can you pick lattimore over andre without even seeing him practice after the terrible knee problem. 100% hell yes you take lattimore. who knows when he gets to 100%

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

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 9:39 AM

Now that is a valid point.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


The real question, is AE also at 100%***


Jul 5, 2012, 9:40 AM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]



military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Fiat Justitia et Pereat Mundus


Re: The real question, is AE also at 100%***


Jul 5, 2012, 9:44 AM

A negative taking a shot at a positive. I see what you done there.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


I'm not sure about


Jul 5, 2012, 9:54 AM

Linebacker.

badge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


QB a push? LB USC?***


Jul 5, 2012, 10:10 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Who are USUC's LBs? That one goes to CU***


Jul 5, 2012, 11:41 AM



2012_pickem_champ.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 10:12 AM

I added a couple of categories:

WR-Clemson: By far
OL-USC: Slightly only because of experience
QB-Clemson: By far, Nobody is mistaking Shaw for a Heisman canidate!
RB-Clemson on AE vs. ML: SC slightly on depth
DB-Clemson
LB-Clemson: I think you'll see a vast difference because of the coaching.
DL-USC: This is SC's only real advantage
kicker-Clemson: By far
Special Teams- Clemson: By far
TE-Clemson: I think Ford may put up some big numbers from this position.
Coaching-Clemson: By far, Offense is inovative, Deffense will be more fundamentaly sound, Special Teams will be attacking, Recruiting is awesome. SC had a lot of turnover in this department.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That's a


Jul 5, 2012, 10:25 AM

good breakdown from a Clemson point of view.


Shaw isn't a heisman candidate and that's a good thing. What he is though is solid and steady. Boyd had the flash last November. Shaw simply played steady and picked things apart.


I think our offensive line isn't great- but it's solid - and better than Clemson's - more so than "slight"


Lb- Clemson? On recruiting rankings yes. On performance on the field? Clemson's linebackers seemed to totally disappear last year - especially toward the end of the season.


Not sure about special teams. Have to see that on the field next year as this can vary greatly year to year.


Coaching by far? of course I'd disagree with that. I don't see that. I know Clemson fans do - but of course that's expected.

Offense is innovative? hmm. Kinda I guess- but tt's not unique anymore. Plenty of teams run similiar styles with variations on it. We certainly did well against it last year - and so did few other teams.

Our strength is our pass rush at the end positions-= which is the greatest problem for an offense like Clemson's - as they found out last year.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You are kinda fun to debate with. I knew SC fans would love


Jul 5, 2012, 10:52 AM

the coaching assessment, compare the production of Spurier and Morris the last two years. Now question the nod goes to Morris offensively. Defensively you will see a great improvement because of the coaching. Yes the recruiting has been impressive, but how many times did the D look confused prior to the snap? BV will simplify (which is exactly what is needed in the college game on D) and emphasize fundamentals. You are going to miss Johnson as the DC. SC also lost several other assistants.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You are kinda fun to debate with. I knew SC fans would love


Jul 5, 2012, 10:59 AM

What I know about preseason predictions is - they are almost always wrong and off-base.


I don't find value in comparing the production of Morris and Spurrier. They aren't facing each other. Much more interested in comparing your offense versus our defense.


I simply don't know how much losing Ellis will hurt. It sounds good to say it will - but his right hand- hand picked guy is taking over - and he called an excellent defense against Nebraska in the bowl game.

So that's left to be determined and no one knows.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Wasn't Ward the DB coach? I never thought that DBs were SCs


Jul 5, 2012, 11:19 AM

strong suit. They had a lot of physically talented players, but they were often caught with mental breakdowns. I also don't think the bowl game is much of a factor either because he basically just kept doing what the 2011 team did. This year it will be different, because he will have to put the puzzle pieces together himself. Johnson was very consistant. Do you rembember the DCs before Johnson? Not so much from a consistancy standpoint.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Ward was the DB coach- and he also


Jul 5, 2012, 10:06 PM

ran practices and developed the gameplan for the defense.


Ellis called the plays from the booth with Ward on the sideline running the defense.



We were 2nd in the the nation in 2011 in passing defense. (Clemson was 50th) Pretty good stats for a team where the DBs aren't a "strong suit"


We tied for 6th in the nation in 2011 in interceptions. (Clemson was 31st)

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Ward was the DB coach- and he also


Jul 6, 2012, 5:27 AM

come on tymick, i thought you knew more about football than that. how many passing teams did y'all play, and arkansas scorched your db's. the sec and navy weren't exactly filling the air with footballs. the #'s for pass d are going to look good.esp with the d-line y'all had.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 1:12 PM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]

Why does Clemson get the automatic nod for DBs? I don't really know much about how much talent South Carolina has at DB after losing Gilmore, but ours weren't good last year at all. Only Blanks is added since last year - have other returning starters improved that much?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 1:51 PM

USC's DB depth is going to be an issue this year. We return swearinger, devonte, auguste, hampton but auguste is changing positions (going to safety most likely). I don't know about Clemson's DB, but ours is a question going into next season.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

SCs DBs benefitted from their pass rush. How many times was


Jul 5, 2012, 2:42 PM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]

Gilmore blown up and not even on the screen on TV? I saw it several times. SCs DBs are more run stoppers like Hollaman vs. coverage guys. We'll see how good they are when a team can block their 2 ends. As for Clemson's DBs, I think that almost the opposite is true in their case. The lack of a consistent pass rush made them better in coverage. Plus they return a lot of experience.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

There are few teams in the country than will block Clowney


Jul 5, 2012, 10:12 PM

and Taylor. They couldn't do it well last year and Clowney barely knew what he was doing most of the year.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Question:


Jul 5, 2012, 10:15 PM

Do you think you will,

A) Be more successful than last year.
B) Be less successful than last year.

Bonus:

Do you think you'll beat Clemson this year?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: There are few teams in the country than will block Clowney


Jul 5, 2012, 10:56 PM [ in reply to There are few teams in the country than will block Clowney ]

At all?

badge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 7, 2012, 4:35 PM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]

Step away from the bong

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 10:25 AM

I agree, but would give slight edge to Clemson at QB position (as long as Tajh has a decent amount of time to throw)and LB's. QB's probably very close and it will depend on both teams' line play. Hope Tajh runs a little better this year.

Instead of kicker, I'll just say Special Teams in general goes to Clemson.

RB certainly goes to SC. Yes, AE is talented, but so is ML. And yes, ML is coming off a pretty sig knee injury, but AE has had some injuries himself...and as much as I hate to say it, seems to be injury prone. I also feel both are different types of RB's. Add in SC's depth (esp since we lost Bellamy) and I give them RB no questions asked.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 11:05 AM

Qb's: we can debate this so I'll call it a push but Boyd was not very good against tough defense's. Throws to many bad interceptions and pressure rattles him. As much as you blame your defense for Orange Bowl debacle, go back and look at last 2-3 minutes of half, Boyd killed you. Shaw got better as year went on and played very well down the stretch. His improvement was key to USC success once Lattimore went down.
rb's: slight edge USC because of depth: Ellington is very good and could start at most schools but I will take Lattimore, Miles, Wilds, Davis and Carson.
Wr's: CU: very good and very deep
TE: USC: Anderson and Cunningham are very solid and Anderson is going to be a special player
DE/DL: USC: not close Taylor and Clowney are as good as it gets at that position.
LB: push CU has recruited well but has not panned out on field
DB: push
Kicker: CU

OL: not even close: CU is in trouble and if one of the starters gets hurt then it is big trouble. NO quality depth and you can flame away but that is the exact words from a hs coach that is big Clemson fan.

Coaching: Really?? Dabo, great recruiter but can you really say he is a better coach than Spurrier?? What happened to CU when Sammy got banged up? USC continued winning after Lattimore went down for the season. Spurrier has adjusted philosophy, coaches to team's strength and has a team that has physically whipped CU for 3 seasons.

Either way it is a fun topic and does kill time until they strap it on in another few weeks.

Have a good one.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Tajh shredded UNC, VT, and FSU all had great Ds***


Jul 5, 2012, 11:54 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

not sure


Jul 5, 2012, 10:14 PM

any of them had great defenses.

Florida State actually finished 1 spot lower than we (South Carolina) did in total defense.

They had a very good defense.


VA Tech had a good defense- but their defensive ends were slow compared to South Carolina's guys. That's simply the way it was - and Clemson had all kinds of trouble with South Carolina defensive line.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: not sure


Jul 5, 2012, 10:20 PM

you guys have certainly arrived. you should go ahead and make reservations in atlanta.

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

We also had trouble against NC St lines


Jul 6, 2012, 1:56 AM [ in reply to not sure ]

does that mean that they were comparable to yours? If the answer is no then that means it was less about what you did and more about what we didn't do. If we could block against UNC that had a strong front 7 and a first round DE coming off the edge and FSU as well that had a very deep and talented DL does that mean that SCs was better or that our OL just didn't play well?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Well, I really don't think it matters- but


Jul 12, 2012, 11:25 PM

I saw our defensive line simply overwhelm your offensive line all night long -

and our defense ranked in the top 5 in total defense last year in all of college football.

I don't know where NC State's defense finished- but it wasn't ahead of ours.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

NC St dominated us worse then you did


Jul 13, 2012, 3:24 PM

But no they don't have a better D then you did. So that means that it's more of how we played ten how you played. Your DL did what it was supposed to do, cause mayhem. Our OL did not do what they did in the first few games against good DL, weather the storm and get better as the game progressed. Not saying you don't deserve credit for whipping our OL's behinds all game because you do but the discrepancy in play wasn't all due to your DL

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 10:50 AM

The only position group I would trade with Clemson is WR. Y'all are more talented at LB but until i see them have a clue where to go on the field I'd take our experience. I wouldn't even consider trading Shaw for Boyd. Every othr posistion is an obvious advantage for us.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Whatever.......***


Jul 5, 2012, 10:58 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: markb1127


Jul 5, 2012, 11:37 AM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]

Agree with you about Wr's and LB's. The best thing regarding the Shamecock LB corps is they tackle well and are very sound with assignments (outside of Wilson, not very talented). Although, CU will have many challenges with the OL, yours will have major challenges as well! Lastly, we will see how Shaw performs week in and week out now that he is clearly "The Man".

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: markb1127


Jul 5, 2012, 11:39 AM

Dead serious. Why would you expect the team that has been much better on the field the last three years to have alot of position units that are not as good as the team they keep beating? Stands to reason that we keep winning because we are better in alot of places.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: markb1127


Jul 5, 2012, 11:42 AM

If this were true:

Why would you expect the team that has been much better on the field the last three years

We never would have lost to SC.......

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: markb1127


Jul 5, 2012, 11:46 AM [ in reply to Re: markb1127 ]

He was the man for the last 7-8 games of season and a bowl win. He got better as year went on and whether you like Spurrier or not our qb improved as season went on.

Boyd on the other hand was stellar against some very bad defenses: NC State made him look bad, ga tech who was avg at best made him look bad, he was awful against USC and again, he killed you in the last minutes of the 1st half of bowl game.

He rattles easily and does not perform well against pass rush. Throws very bad picks at very bad times.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

another chickentroll for the ignore list***


Jul 5, 2012, 11:47 AM



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


Re: markb1127


Jul 5, 2012, 11:58 AM [ in reply to Re: markb1127 ]

Until we play this year SC has beat us in almost every category last year and it is impossible to say what a freshman will do on either team before the season even starts.Until CU beats them they have the better team.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We have the same feeling about changing QBs.***


Jul 5, 2012, 1:24 PM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]



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

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 7, 2012, 3:10 PM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]

man, (if you are), you sure are football ignorant. y'all have won 3 in a row, get over yourselves. y'all were better on the los's last year,i'll give you that. we also played with our starting lt hurt,ae hurt,watkins hurt,and i'm not saying the everyday bumps and bruises from an end of year football game. that is almost 30% of our starting offensive unit. y'all had lost latty,which was huge,i'll give you that.the defense is what won the game and y'all have lost the best dc you ever had-HUGE. we will now have a year in our offensive system, and both teams will be 1st year w/defense ( ours was a needed change). clemson will beat usuc in the valley this year,mark it down.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 8, 2012, 8:41 PM

wouldnt have mattered if yall were perfectly healthy. we were the better and much more physical team. will be the same this year.

also, starting a new defense with a new coordinator is not the same as keeping the same scheme under a guy who has been coaching as your #2 defensive guy for several years. there is a reason ellis johnson wanted ward with him. in his one game as top guy our defense was excellent.

we will once again be much better on both lines. we may take a small step back on defense but wont be much different. we will be better offensively. i see nothing that makes me think the game wont be very similar to the last three. when looking at the clemson team i just dont see any area that will give yall enough advantage to overcome all the disadvantages.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 13, 2012, 10:32 AM

the interim (at the time) dc was facing nebraska, a one dimensional running team, which went right into the teeth of y'alls defense. he'll face an entirely different scenario when he has to scheme against a team with arguably the best offensive talent y'all will face this year when usuc comes to the valley. our lines will no longer be inexperienced by the time we meet, and the o-line,in particular, will be better talent-wise than what we have had in recent years. the only advantage i see that y'all have against us is (basically) having a bye-week to get ready for us, which coincidentally has been y'alls formula for the current streak. you can go ahead and count this game as one of usuc's losses for the year,as we will be going to 2-0 against the sec for the 2012 regular season.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Looks like another


Jul 7, 2012, 7:45 PM [ in reply to Re: USC V Clemson by position ]

10 yr old coot fan...take your garnet glasses off moron

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 12:23 PM

I love Tajh but Barkley probably edges him at QB. Dont know much about the Trojan receivers.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 5:12 PM

Their receivers are very good. Some people even say they may be as good as ours. Personally I doubt that, though !!

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


Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 1:57 PM

I pretty much agree with your very fair assessment. Clemson's WRs are dynamic, no doubt about it.

We return some experience on the O-line, 3 starters are back.
Both QBs are good, and play different styles with Shaw being a more spread offense type of QB

I understand we are the rival, but nobody outside of Clemson would take AE over a rehabbing ML.. nobody.

The defense is accurate, with LB's being very close I think.

Finally, our special teams will always be suspect, so it's hard to find anything convincing to say ours is better than yours.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

No way they have better LB's***


Jul 5, 2012, 2:52 PM



military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: No way they have better LB's***


Jul 5, 2012, 4:37 PM

so where was the problem with a defense that gave up nearly 400 yds a game. the dl was very good as were the db's.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Our LBs have not played well historically since Steele came


Jul 5, 2012, 5:18 PM

in terms of talent we have a deeper and more talent corp of LBs imo. It's all about the coach at that point and some of our best LBs couldn't get on the field because Steele's scheme was too complicated for them and they were thinking instead of playing.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Our secondary was the problem last year with youth


Jul 7, 2012, 6:25 PM [ in reply to Re: No way they have better LB's*** ]

And injuries as LB was very young. SC doesn't have LB 's better than Anthony and Willard and a healthy Steward will be back. Anthony will be maybe best LB in the ACC. Name 2 coots better than Willard and Anthony? Also add maybe best teacher of LB 's in coaching in Venables

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I won't disagree...


Jul 5, 2012, 5:39 PM [ in reply to No way they have better LB's*** ]

But you understand the differences in a traditional 4-3 vs the 4-2-5 defense, right??

The tigers have 3 starters returning at the LB position. Hawkins (SR), Willard (SR) and Christian (Jr), so that's a lot of experience in those positions.

They have 4 Sr linebackers that play the outside LB position. That's both starting LB's and their backups. They also have SR DaVonte Holloman playing "spur" the hybrid LB/safety position (that acts like a Safety on some plays and a MLB on other plays).

So they have 5 Sr's for those positions. If you look at it honestly and objectively it's kind of a push in the LB position.

However, barring turnovers (a fumble recovery/interception by a LB) linebackers won't be where next year's game is decided.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Stalwart universities—Harvard, Princeton, Yale—most certainly offer status. The Citadel offers character. "


Anthony was the starter last year coot***


Jul 7, 2012, 6:28 PM



military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Anthony was the starter last year coot***


Jul 13, 2012, 1:57 AM

Anthony started only 3 games last season: NCSU, USC, and the ACCCG vs VT. Willard started 12 games, Hawkins started 11 games, and Christian started 8 games...

Sometimes Clemson utilized a traditional 3-LB 4-3 base to start games, and other times they used only 2 LBs, but used 3 CBs along with their FS and SS (such as versus Troy they used Breeland instead of Willard, and versus MD they started Robinson along with Hawkins and Willard in lieu of Christian). In all 3 games that Anthony started, they used Martin Jenkins vs NCSU and USC, and Johnathan Meeks versus VT in the ACCCG, and started Anthony and Willard as true LBs....

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 5, 2012, 7:25 PM

rb ? goes to the best backup

Will 1st string be around by then ?

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

Ellington played all but on game and had 1200 yds


Jul 7, 2012, 6:30 PM

So where do you get that crap

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

In no way


Jul 7, 2012, 7:39 PM

are they better at LB...other than that it seems right

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

if our 5 star linebackers adjust to the new system


Jul 7, 2012, 7:53 PM

we might end up with the edge over USC at this position.

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

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 8, 2012, 11:53 AM

My thoughts

QB - Boyd was better than Shaw early in the year and Shaw was better than Boyd late in the year. Slight edge Shaw

RB - Questions about Lattimore's health, but Ellington also has been gimpy a lot. USC has more depth. Edge USC

WR - Sammy is probably the best WR in the nation and Nuke is not far behind. USC has plenty of potential, but not proven talent like Clemson. Edge Clemson.

OL - This could be one of USC's best OL's in a while. Clemson's fast pace offense should help their OL keep defenses tired and give them an advantage. Edge USC.

TE - Don't know about Clemson guys. Buster Anderson very good at USC. Push due to my lack of knowledge.

Defense

DL- Big shoes to fill at USC losing Robertson and Ingram. Clowney and Taylor are all SEC type players. Clemson always has good DL. Edge USC.

LB - Niether teams LB's have proven much. Edge to Clemson just based on recruiting stars.

DB's - Losing Gilmore hurts USC. Edge Clemson

Coaching - HC - Edge USC, OC - Edge Clemson, DC - Edge Clemson. Overall a push

Special teams - Sammy Watikins is the difference - Edge Clemson

Intangibles - Not as familiar with Clemson, but USC has a good group of kids especially the leaders. They have one or two kids who may get in trouble, but they are not the leaders on the team now like under Garcia. Shaw, Taylor, Lattimore, and the likes are solid kids. Sammy getting in trouble may end up helping Clemson if he dedicates himself. If not could cause problems. Edge USC.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If true, we lose yet again.***


Jul 8, 2012, 7:18 PM



military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 8, 2012, 7:20 PM

ellington had a productive season, lattimore is coming off a tough injury

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


Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 8, 2012, 7:25 PM

WR- Clemson
O-line: USuCk, at this point. We'll see how ours gels.
QB- Clemson. Not convinced about Shaw at this point. He tore us up, but that wasn't really hard to do.
RB- USuCk. Believe it or not, they have capable RBs behind Latti. We don't know how well our backups will perform.
TE- Clemson
DB- Clemson.
LB- Clemson
DL- USuCk
Kicker- Clemson

Coaching- Push, for now. Morris is the better OC. Neither team knows about its DC. Spurrier is the more accomplished HC at this point.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 13, 2012, 12:56 AM

> Not much going on so let's compare USC V Clemson by
> position in 2012.
> WR-Clemson
> OL-USC
> QB-push-Taj more experience and better stats but Shaw
> came on strong v Florida, Clemson and Nebraska
> RB-USC
> DB-Clemson
> LB-USC
> DL-USC
> kicker-Clemson
>
> Thoughts?

Looks fairly good...only thing I'd question is the LB position: South Carolina's LB position will be one of it's strongest units on the entire team in 2012. As we all know, USC utilizes a 4-2-5, with one of the 3 LB spots in a conventional 4-3 (Sam) being used for their safety/LB hybrid, or SPUR position. So USC has 2 LB spots, and their 2-deep at those spots will be manned by 4 seniors with a TON of starts and experience. They are expected to be a strength in assisting the DL this season...

However saying this, isn't Clemson's LB position deep with very talented players? IMO, USC's LB unit as a whole - although experienced - is the one position that's lacking a lot of eye-popping talent. They have Damario Jeffery who was a solid to high 4* per Rivals, but he has bounced from position to position and has never settled down. 4* Gilchrist is now a FB. Pretty much all others were mid to high 3*s out of HS.

So it'll be the young but highly talented LBs of CU versus the not-so talented but highly experienced LBs of USC...

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 13, 2012, 10:18 AM

Nothing behind Lattimore? How about Kenny Miles? Don't remember the 140 yards he hung on Clemson?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I can see SOS working ML like a mule this season.


Jul 13, 2012, 10:23 AM

Did I hear someone say that carries in the SEC take a toll?

Are you saying there is a different quality to SEC defenses as opposed to ACC defenses?

I notice you said SEC - not ACC, not Big Anything, not even major college defenses. Thanks for admitting what everyone knows.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I can see SOS working ML like a mule this season.


Jul 13, 2012, 10:37 AM

look at the nfl rosters, you will see that the acc puts around the same numbers of players into the league as the sec. the sec is top heavy, 2-4 very good teams every year, and the rest no better than any other league, and usuc is not included in those 2-4 teams, and EVERYONE,including other sec fans, knows this.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: SCs DBs benefitted from their pass rush. How many times was


Jul 13, 2012, 10:35 AM

>>We'll see how good they are when a team can block their 2 ends<<

Do you see Clemson as able to block Taylor and Clowney?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: SCs DBs benefitted from their pass rush. How many times was


Jul 13, 2012, 2:52 PM

yes. they will get a couple sacks, i'm sure. but that will leave alot of plays on the field, and with the playmakers we have, i don't see y'all with enough defenders to stop them all. doo-doo and taylor can get their sacks, and watkins, hopkins, bryant, humphries ford , ellington and by then hopper and brown, etc., we'll get their yards and td's,too. sounds like usucs worst nightmare to me.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: SCs DBs benefitted from their pass rush. How many times was


Jul 13, 2012, 3:41 PM

The problem is, it's not just the sacks that will plague Clemson....it's all the other near-sacks, QB hurries, knock-downs immediately after throwing the ball. It's all the collapsing pockets that will make Boyd rush his passes. Boyd has shown a tendency to get quite flustered when being pressured throughout a game: his "poise" has not been that great. Boyd threw as many INT as he threw TDs in the final 4-5 games of last season. Will it happen again??

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: SCs DBs benefitted from their pass rush. How many times was


Jul 13, 2012, 4:55 PM

it was his 1st yr. starting! yes, i know it was shaws also, but the styles are a little different, don't you think? boyd will be more mature his second go 'round, and the hurries, knockdowns, etc., won't bother him near as much as last year, you had better get to him,and quick, or there is a good chance that 6 more is on the scoreboard. when we get ahead early, y'all don't have the long play capability to come back, there is not a doubt in my mind that we win, and by 10+,at that.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 13, 2012, 10:40 AM

Ellington can strike from anywhere on the field in either direction.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Garcia was a top pick....


Jul 13, 2012, 10:46 AM

Don't diss the CFL. Joe Kapp, Joe Thiesman and Doug Flutie put their time in the CFL before getting into the NFL.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

lrn2rply***


Jul 13, 2012, 1:42 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 13, 2012, 2:35 PM

I don't mean this to flame, but where do you see that Clemson's LBs are better than South Carolina's? I'm honestly not familiar with Clemson's LB group, but SC returns 4 seniors to share playing time in 2 LB positions I do believe. Holloman will play Spur and should be have a great year as he can cover well and hits hard.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: USC V Clemson by position


Jul 13, 2012, 2:44 PM

I agree with most of the other evaluations, though.

QB- Depends on how both Shaw and Tajh play throughout the upcoming year. Tajh was great early on, but regressed towards the end. Shaw was solid but not flashy.

RB- Explosiveness goes to AE. Power running goes to ML assuming he can bounce back from injury. Depth goes to USC.

WR- Clemson by far.

OL- I give the vote to SC

TE- I'm not familiar with Clemson's current Tight ends, but Clemson returns senior Cunningham and has a very good backup in Buster Anderson who can make plays.

DL- No question that SC has the advantage here. Needs good DTs to step up but shouldn't be a problem. Lots of depth.

LB- Once again, not familiar with Clemson's LBs, feel free to enlighten me. Carolina returns 3 or 4 seniors and Holloman will play great in the Spur.

DB- Not familiar with Clemson's DBs, but SC has problems with depth, although has some solid names back there.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

LB explination


Jul 13, 2012, 3:18 PM

Talent wise I feel we get the nod as every player on the field is a former 5-4 star player. Anthony who will be our MLB was a former 5 star player and was the best of our LBs last year despite being a freshmen. The rest of our talent is young most of them soph/RS FS this year. However since Venables got here we've seen that talent translate to the field. i give Clemson a slight lean because talent wise I believe we have a deeper and stronger corp then SC but experience wise it goes to SC.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: LB explination


Jul 13, 2012, 3:44 PM

So what you just said was you give CU the edge based on sheer talent and potential of what COULD be, over experience and actual in-game production, or over what HAS been done.

That's a mighty high limb to hang your hopes on....

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I acknlowedged that SC has the expereince


Jul 13, 2012, 4:46 PM

However, SC's LBs aren't that impressive talent wise. They're fundamentally sound and don't make too many mistakes but if you ask who has the better LB corp then I'd taken Clemson's over SC. You can't coach talent.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I acknlowedged that SC has the expereince


Jul 13, 2012, 4:53 PM

I guess we shall see once the season gets started.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: LB explination


Jul 13, 2012, 4:46 PM [ in reply to LB explination ]

Talent is always good to have, but I believe our LBs have both talent and 4-5 years experience in the program. What do you think about your TEs and DBs?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I'm not worried about either


Jul 13, 2012, 4:48 PM

We are stacked at the TE position with talent and experience. Brandon Ford has always had great hands and had put on muscle and speed in the off season. He'll do a good job taking over for Allen. We really didn't lose any talent at the DB position except for Coty Sensabaugh but we have good young talent at the Cb position and good Senior experience and talent at the Safety position. I'm more concerned about our DB next year after we lose 3 of our starters.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I'm not worried about either


Jul 13, 2012, 4:56 PM

We're pretty loaded as well at the tight end position. Cunningham, Anderson, and 2 or 3 newcomers who looked impressive in spring practices. the only think I'm worried about anywhere on the field, other than ML's recovery, is the depth problems we have at DB. Should see a lot of new names there.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Re: Wait A Minute


Jul 13, 2012, 3:15 PM

Seriously? Jefferey became fat and slow and yall had turnover at the position who would get him the ball. Naturally his touches would decrease. And obviously ML's carries would not increase an additional 20%. And yes his carries the first two years were extraordinary. Coach Spurrier is riding him as any good coach would. Spiller would have easily broken the all purpose yards record if Coach Bowden would have done the same.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Re: I would take AE over ML .... just because of the type of


Jul 13, 2012, 3:23 PM

The majority of injuries are the result of a culmination of activities. (athletic trainer/physical therapist opinion) Though in football, one hit can take you out.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: well sure


Jul 13, 2012, 3:36 PM

Spiller actually lit yall up till the LB/DB wrapped/rolled his ankle. Then we put our beloved Merriweather who continued to dominate. Nobody will ever find out why Bowden pulled hik for Davis. Davis was great but he had these inexplicable games where he was completely ineffective. For example, that game....

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: well sure


Jul 13, 2012, 3:36 PM

Spiller actually lit yall up till the LB/DB wrapped/rolled his ankle. Then we put our beloved Merriweather who continued to dominate. Nobody will ever find out why Bowden pulled hik for Davis. Davis was great but he had these inexplicable games where he was completely ineffective. For example, that game....

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 152
| visibility 51
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic