|
Replies: 79
| visibility 1
|
Fan [87]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 75
Joined: 8/6/11
|
Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 8:29 AM
|
|
Georgia finished ranked #32 in total defense in 2012 and lost 8 starters from that unit. I do realize they have what will most likely be the best offense we will see this year, but if our defense can get a few stops we win by two td's. Just for the record, LSU finished 2012 ranked #8 in total defense-
|
|
|
|
 |
Freshman [4]
TigerPulse: 15%
Posts: 54
Joined: 8/21/13
|
Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 8:34 AM
|
|
Just for the record we're not LSU. LSU had 8 three and outs and still came close to winning
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2772]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3736
Joined: 1/15/13
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 8:40 AM
|
|
And what makes you think GA won't have 8 3 and outs??
Your offense is good, but not perfect.
Our offense is good, but not perfect.
Defense will win this game, so something has to give. Our defense has returning experience, yours has talent and a hope of a promise.
In the event of a shootout, using deductive reasoning, what do you really see happening????
Go Tigers!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [4]
TigerPulse: 15%
Posts: 54
Joined: 8/21/13
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 8:58 AM
|
|
Because our offense is a lot better and more balanced and will be able to keep your offense off the field longer
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [36207]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21509
Joined: 10/27/03
|
Nice fact-based commentary....you have me sold
Aug 25, 2013, 9:34 AM
|
|
Oh by the way my dad could beat your dad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56764]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 39627
Joined: 11/12/04
|
yo mamma.***
Aug 25, 2013, 10:22 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6320]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5112
Joined: 7/19/13
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 11:36 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
Um, your offense ranked JUST inside the top 25 last year at 22 while we were top 10. Do not let facts knock your teeth in the floor, mutt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 2:53 PM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
More balanced? Than LSU maybe, Mettenberger sucks. More balanced than Clemson? Doubtful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 3:19 PM
|
|
CU = 4181 passing - 2484 rushing
UGA = 3991 passing - 2556 rushing
Looks like were more balanced on offense than Clemson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4787]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9986
Joined: 6/12/10
|
that looks pretty dang close, either way. 6 of 1, 1/2 dozen
Aug 25, 2013, 4:01 PM
|
|
of the other. oh, thats right, y'alls were sec balanced, ours are only acc balanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: that looks pretty dang close, either way. 6 of 1, 1/2 dozen
Aug 25, 2013, 4:11 PM
|
|
Naw I dont think that matters. I have seen a number of posts that downplay the quality of our receivers. And minimize the fact that we threw for a ton of yards last year. I guess folks get so enamored with Gurley and Marshall that they forget that we have the best TE in the conference and a future record setting QB. Our offensive philosophy is predicated on balance and we have the players to make that happen.
Bama averaged giving up 250 yards per game. We gained 394 against them. Not exactly a shabby offensive performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [38]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 39
Joined: 8/15/13
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:06 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
We can run and throw equally well. We lead the nation in yards per play. CU was 25th. I'm not sure why CU fans think their offense is so powerful. They have to run 1000 plays a game to try and out score their opponent. UGA's defense is very talented, deep and very focused. CU has to find a running game. Go back last year and look at you schedule to see who you put those numbers up against. We punished GT an AU. For those fans that think CU is going to roll, you need to wake up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [87]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 75
Joined: 8/6/11
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:13 AM
|
|
You did lead the nation in YARDS PER PLAY, but you were ranked behind us in total offensive production as we were #8 in the nation and you were #11. Just the facts, bro-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [38]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 39
Joined: 8/15/13
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:24 AM
|
|
I'm glad you speak using facts. The facts are you have to try and run 20 more plays than your opponents to win. Look at the teams you had to "out score" last year. The weak schedule CU plays gives you fans some serious confidence. Sunday morning you will wake up to the real world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [87]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 75
Joined: 8/6/11
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:33 AM
|
|
Did I strike a nerve? You brought up "leading the nation in yards per play". That's impressive, but I'm guessing you heard that somewhere and thought it sounded good- I also expect you didn't realize you were behind us in total offensive production, but you are. Do some research and come up with something better than the totally worthless statistic of "yards per play". What a joke-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:37 AM
|
|
In this case YPG is more "worthless" than YPP.
YPG is dependent upon the highly variable stat of number of plays ran. YPP removes said variability and focuses on the offensive potential ever time the ball is snapped regardless of how variable that number of times may be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Yeah, but then it introduces an average that doesn't account
Aug 25, 2013, 11:29 AM
|
|
for taking knees, 'milking the clock,' and penalties. If you're penalized 5 yds, then make all that up and then some the next play, then the penalized yardage shouldn't count towards your YPP, but it sounds like it would.
I particularly don't like using stats. I can SEE where Clemson's strengths are and where they struggled last year. I don't need stats that ignore real time game conditions that can manipulate and inflate stats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
I'm not a big stats guy either
Aug 25, 2013, 11:56 AM
|
|
Stats are a nice way to help analyze what already happened, but they are a pretty poor indicator of future performance if you ask me. I am just pointing out a logical fallacy in putting more emphasis in one stat over another especially one that it so highly influenced by such a volatile fact as plays run per game.
Matchups win games, and more specifically matchups at the LOS win games in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6320]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5112
Joined: 7/19/13
|
ACTUALLY
Aug 25, 2013, 11:43 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
PLAYS per game is what equals up to more POINTS per game, and in case you do not know, you WIN THE GAME by scoring more POINTS. Clemson ranked 7th in plays ran and 6th in the country in total number of points. Ugay 18th and 49th. That is pretty telling if I should say so..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
Re: ACTUALLY
Aug 25, 2013, 11:50 AM
|
|
Yes, that's elementary. More plays run equal more yards and more points. No one disputes that.
The problem comes in when the actual number of plays run varies so much from game to game. Who's to say how many plays Clemson will run against UGA when one week against Jr they only ran ~60 but in another week against LSU they ran ~100?
I could say it'd be closer to the 60 number because of UGA's offense holding the ball better like Jr did. You could say it's going to be closer to 100 because of the fantastic tempo "The Chad" likes to run at. But really we won't know until the game is over, so citing a stat that relies so heavily upon the number of plays run is a fool's errand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [36207]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21509
Joined: 10/27/03
|
You Belittle The Fact That We Win By Running Lots of Plays
Aug 25, 2013, 9:36 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
Go ask the LSU defense how well they were able to stop Clemson's offense in the 4th. For the record that was in a climate-controlled dome. Don't write off tempo as a non-factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
Re: You Belittle The Fact That We Win By Running Lots of Plays
Aug 25, 2013, 9:39 AM
|
|
I'll answer that with a question.
Why was the same Clemson offense able to run ~100 plays against LSU but only ~60 plays against USCjr?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56764]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 39627
Joined: 11/12/04
|
Da Freeeeeeek!!!!
Aug 25, 2013, 10:22 AM
|
|
and inexplicably abandoning the run game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6320]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5112
Joined: 7/19/13
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
Re: Only fools answer questions with questions
Aug 25, 2013, 11:57 AM
|
|
So, the offense has nothing to do with it?
Oops. Did that question thingy again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 2:56 PM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
Does it matter? If you can run 20 more plays then do it. Your argument is dumb. When you beat the dog mess out of people who cares how many plays you run. Do you really think Clemson's offense is "nothing special?" I hope your defense thinks that and takes practice lightly this week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2111]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 3057
Joined: 6/19/10
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 4:56 PM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
You need to go back and look at your schedule from last year again to see who you put up those points against too. Your schedule was not any more difficult than ours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:25 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
Another fact. UGA returns our entire offense minus Tavarres King. That includes the #1 backfield in the country. We've added depth on the line as well and added a standout JUCO receiver. We have every reason to believe that our offemse will be even better.
With the talent Clemson lost at center, receiver, TE and running back theres just as much reason to believe that Clemsons offense will regress. We wont need to be as good defensively as LSU was because yall wont be as good offensively as yall were.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 2:58 PM
|
|
Another year under Chad Morris, Tajh Boyd, one of the best QBs in the nation, yes we lost Ellington but he was always banged up, he missed about as many games as he played it. Brandon Ford is a big loss at TE, yes. But when you can replace Nuk with a former 4 star (Martavis Bryant) and a former 5 star (Charone Peake) I hardly see any regression.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [555]
TigerPulse: 23%
Posts: 2405
Joined: 11/29/10
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 4:42 PM
|
|
between them Bryant and Peake have 44 receptions in their college careers. As heralded as they both were coming out of HS.....one would not expect we'd all still be waiting for the production 3 years later. Up until this point clemson has had the luxury of not having to depend on these two to win the big games. You can't say thier careers have shadowed Nukes that's for sure. CU can only hope the light bulb has finally turned on for these two this season. Hopkins and Brown accounted for 101 catches and 18 tds in 2012 and I'll be surprised if there isn't a regression based what they've done or haven't done up until this point in their careers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
The problem with that logic is .....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:26 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
The number of plays run is highly variable.
Clemson depended upon running more plays to increase the total game production, however the total number of plays run varied from a low of ~60 to a high of ~100. That variability makes it very hard to predict exactly how many plays Clemson will run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Variablity
Aug 25, 2013, 11:01 AM
|
|
Why point out the variability in plays per game, and not the inherent variability in yards per play? You use the average for one (yards per play) but then point to the variability of the other as some sort of sign of inconsistency?
The simple fact is you believe yards per play is somehow a golden stat. More power to ya, but its just one of many that make up the game, and it's also quite variant from game to game.
In the end, we can make just about any statistical argument we want in order to make either team look better than the other.
What I know is we both have very very good offenses, and we both have questions marks on defense. It'll be interesting to see the outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
Re: Variablity
Aug 25, 2013, 11:59 AM
|
|
I agree. Stats can say whatever you want them to depending upon which ones you choose to emphasize. No question.
Just pointing out that YPP takes out one more variable than YPG. Neither is an end-all-be-all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
But its an odd view to take
Aug 25, 2013, 12:31 PM
|
|
Seeing as how an offense's potency is (I believe we will agree) best measured by points scored. I know yards per game is a great measuring stick as well, but it seems odd to then further break that down to yards per play in an attempt to make that a more important stat all while ignoring plays per game.
It comes down, for us, to this. Our offense is geared on a fast paced attack which, while we'd all like to score on every play, is actually designed to wear a defense down over time. It is geared to making defenders make many decisions over time, and eventually exploiting their mistakes. And it works, until it doesn't, just like every other offense.
We saw a good example of this in the LSU game. LSU was a dang good defensive team, but given enough time and plays we exploited those mistakes. Now, of course, the counter to that argument is what happens if you don't get your chances, but I think that is true of every offensive concept. It's a no-brainer that UGA will attempt to control the ball and clock, but it is also a no-brainer that y'all would love to score on every play as every team would.
This is going to be an interesting game. And, save for a few folks here, most of us here are expecting a tough game. I've said before this is one of those rare games I can literally see ANY outcome as possible. We could be blown out, lose a tight one, win a tight one, or blow y'all out. I'm guessing it's one of the middle two, but it'll be interesting no doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
I think it will be a good game too.
Aug 25, 2013, 1:53 PM
|
|
I can make cogent arguments for either team to win the game in a variety of fashions.
Hope it turns out in the Dawgs favor, but Clemson could easily earn the victory too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [566]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 727
Joined: 12/12/12
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:28 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
What makes GA fans think they're offense is so powerful? Same thing that makes Clemson fans know theirs is...statistics. If you want to use GT as a barometer, we put up more points on GT than you guys did. It was only our D that was lacking. Obviously your D that sent 8 players to the NFL finally showed up that game. Since we want to use teams as a barometer, what about SC? Y'all put up 7 points on SC. We put up 17 and had a couple of drives that should have led to TD's but we lost focus. SC put up 35 on your talented D. Our pathetic, hopeless D held SC to 28. It's hard to argue stats, but common sense doesn't lie either. It's also safe to say GA starts out the season very sloppy, just like last year when Buffalo put up 30 points on you. Not saying that will happen this year at all...I believe GA is very talented on both sides of the ball, and think this will be a back and forth game til the end, but have a lapse like last year on D and Clemson will put up 60 on you and run you right out of Death Valley. That's not just some fans wishful thinking...stats prove we can.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [176]
TigerPulse: 27%
Posts: 279
Joined: 12/7/98
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:46 AM
|
|
Cord--
What drives did Clemson lose focus and not score TD's? Outside of the first possession how many total plays did Clemson run in the redzone?
You guys are super proud of the LSU win but if Les Miles doesn't lose his mind on their last offensive series you lose the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devotee [344]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 572
Joined: 7/28/13
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 9:53 AM
|
|
See that's not true . That's wrong. Les miles had struggled all day and decided a quick coke throws would win it. And the qb failed so they lost. They got out performed. If they run sure, maybe they get the furst down, but maybe they don't. He didn't think they would so he passed. And LSU got a gift wrapped td early n the game . My point is , to say Clemson got lucky is purely fiction. LSU simply didn't execute the plays to win. Period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42368
Joined: 7/31/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 3:03 PM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
You seem to discount the rest of the game and especially the rest of the 4th quarter. Miles called 3 bad plays but we made all the right plays that put us in that situation. Something you folks can't say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42368
Joined: 7/31/10
|
3? Gained 8 on 1st down throwing. That's never mentioned.***
Aug 25, 2013, 3:18 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: 3? Gained 8 on 1st down throwing. That's never mentioned.***
Aug 25, 2013, 3:19 PM
|
|
Thank you SOLOS. I forgot about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42368
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Not jumping on you. It just shows the vacuity of their
Aug 25, 2013, 3:22 PM
|
|
"reasoning".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [38]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 39
Joined: 8/15/13
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 10:02 AM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
All but one of our players are back on offense. CU lost several on offense. That what us UGA fans are trying to understand when CU fans say they have this great offense. I agree, the scheme works for CU but CU has to replace some key positions (RB, TE) first. We'll see Saturday night what each of us have and don't have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5282]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6926
Joined: 11/5/12
|
Re: Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 12:36 PM
|
|
not necessarily...Bryant, Watkins, Peake, Humphries...all receivers from last year, and also count Sammy's freshman star year where he outperformed Nuk (the only one you seem to think you need to have worried about).
TE...if Cooper does make it back (heard some say maybe..I'm doubting), he was in the LSU game making some of the TE plays. IF not, you oughta go read what several have been saying about Leggett. Though yes, is is an unproven guy till game play, things point to him being a TE that could match the production of Ford easily.
RB...Hot Rod was playing last year too...that play around 7:10 in the second qtr in the LSU game was Hot Rod and it went for a first down. Hot Rod is also who was eating up Clowney in the first qtr of the Scar game until Morris abandoned the run...so you really think he can't perform? Keep thinking that.
So who else are we missing...just the center?? O_O
It's interesting to see how you think UGA can replace 7 guys and the defense will be the same or better, but Clemson replacing 3 on offense couldn't possibly have guys just as good or better to make up for it. The logic is just hypocritical to say the least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [51528]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43076
Joined: 8/10/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [555]
TigerPulse: 23%
Posts: 2405
Joined: 11/29/10
|
Re: And struggled with Buffalo.***
Aug 25, 2013, 4:51 PM
|
|
a very good point......the first game of the season. CU looked just as polished versus Auburn in their opener.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6320]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5112
Joined: 7/19/13
|
EVEN IF
Aug 25, 2013, 12:54 PM
[ in reply to Re: Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
Your yards per play stat were a valid argument, which it is not mind you, it would be a pretty telling tell in comparing your YPP argument against our one common opponent from last year.
Your YPP against scar was 3.34 while ours was 5.55.
Game, set, match....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [358]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 773
Joined: 4/29/13
|
Counting can be hard sometimes, but
Aug 25, 2013, 1:50 PM
|
|
We had three common opponents last year.
But there are no stats out there that will really give knowledge about the outcome of this game. We just have to have fun watching it play out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [87]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 75
Joined: 8/6/11
|
Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 8:42 AM
[ in reply to Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
You're right, you sure aren't LSU. There is no way your defense has any hope of coming remotely close to stopping our offense like LSU did, and like you said- they lost-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22381]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31279
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Your defense was nowhere near LSU's and you lost 7 starters.
Aug 25, 2013, 9:04 AM
[ in reply to Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
But, Georgia logic says that the guys that were on the bench last year or in high school are better than those starters.
Right.
Josh Harvey-Clemens would have been a big help playing us. But, alas, he sits on his ###.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [51528]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43076
Joined: 8/10/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93612]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95387
Joined: 12/25/09
|
But the coach said this defense could be as good as...
Aug 25, 2013, 9:08 AM
|
|
last year's defense...and the dog fans had that warm fuzzy feeling again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devotee [344]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 572
Joined: 7/28/13
|
The argument about yards per play is
Aug 25, 2013, 9:16 AM
|
|
Worthless. It's a style difference. Has little weight
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [108]
TigerPulse: 34%
Posts: 330
Joined: 2/6/07
|
Re: This is what I do not understand....When is the last
Aug 25, 2013, 9:18 AM
|
|
double-digit Clemson win against any SEC team?
Even against an 3-9 Auburn team last season, Clemson won 26-19 and UGA is widely expected to be at worst a Top 15 team, yet not one Clemson poster expects anything less than a 17 or more beatdown?
That seems hopelessly optimistic with the losses on offense and the problems on defense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42368
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Never said that.... Clemson by 10+.***
Aug 25, 2013, 9:25 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [51528]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43076
Joined: 8/10/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [25385]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14696
Joined: 11/3/11
|
For nearly 50 years I have had a simple take on winning:
Aug 25, 2013, 9:36 AM
[ in reply to Re: This is what I do not understand....When is the last ] |
|
I don't give a hoot in h3ll how many points are on the board...as long as CLEMSON HAS ONE MORE THAN OUR OPPONENT. Frankly, that's all I care about in our game against the Dawgs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: This is what I do not understand....When is the last
Aug 25, 2013, 3:06 PM
[ in reply to Re: This is what I do not understand....When is the last ] |
|
Speak for yourself. You're reading the dumbs posters. Most of us believe this game will be decided by a touchdown or less.
Clemson struggled with Auburn, USC struggled with Vandy, Georgia struggled with Buffalo. There's a lot of kinks in the first game of the season and I expect the same from Georgia and Clemson. The winner will be the team that makes the most mistakes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: This is what I do not understand....When is the last
Aug 25, 2013, 3:07 PM
|
|
The winner will make the LEAST mistakes. My apologies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42368
Joined: 7/31/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devotee [344]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 572
Joined: 7/28/13
|
And lets be real
Aug 25, 2013, 9:19 AM
|
|
If u r a UGA fan and think for a second that your receivers are better than ours, u r dreaming. It's just silly. I believe ur backs are a bit better but clemsons receivers are some of the best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devotee [344]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 572
Joined: 7/28/13
|
Wow ok let's look mr UGA fan
Aug 25, 2013, 9:41 AM
|
|
Final Record: 12-2, 7-1 (SEC)
09/01/12 Buffalo Athens, GA Won 45-23 ---
09/08/12 at Missouri Columbia, MO Won 41-20 ---
09/15/12 Florida Atlantic Athens, GA Won 56-20 ---
09/22/12 Vanderbilt Athens, GA Won 48-3 ---
09/29/12 Tennessee Athens, GA Won 51-44 ---
10/06/12 at South Carolina Columbia, SC Lost 35-7 ---
10/13/12 --- Open Date ---
10/20/12 at Kentucky Lexington, KY Won 29-24 ---
10/27/12 Florida Jacksonville, FL Won 17-9 ---
11/03/12 Ole Miss (HC) Athens, GA Won 37-10 ---
11/10/12 at Auburn Auburn, AL Won 38-0
11/17/12 Georgia Southern Athens, GA Won 45-14 ---
11/24/12 Georgia Tech Athens, GA Won 42-10 ---
2012 Dr. Pepper SEC Championship Game
Saturday
12/01/12 Alabama Atlanta, GA Lost 32-28 ---
2013 Capital One Bowl
Tuesday
01/01/13 Nebraska Orlando, FL Won 45-31 ---
Looks like you had 20 points scored on you by Florida Atlantic. You beat Florida on the road, nice win but they got pasted by Louisville. You played a solid d in sc and ur powerful all world o scored a whopping 3 points. You coulda lost to Tennessee and you beat a lot of teams you should have. Auburn, ga southern, gt, etc..... Not exactly a super tough schedule if u r gonna make fun of ours. Sure u beat auburn by more than us but seriously, u played them late , much different situation. They had pretty much expected to lose by then. U played tough against Alabama but still lost. And you beat Nebraska . LSU would have most likely crushed u like sc did. And u lost most of your d. You play in Death Valley . I really think UGA might be in trouble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56764]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 39627
Joined: 11/12/04
|
maybe if we could just play a little better than Kentucky...***
Aug 25, 2013, 10:26 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 10:03 AM
|
|
I think Clemson folks get hung up on the '8 starters to the NFL" thing. As a defense we did not compete for an entire year. And still we finished ranked something like 30 spots higher than the Clemson defense. Our defense last year was plagued with selfish attitudes, multiple starters suspended to start the season. Suspensions that lasted into the 5th game. It took a public a$$ chewing from Shawn Williams to get all that NFL talent to begin playing together.
There is a lot to be said for team chemistry and we have that this year on defense. Talking about how the Georgia defense played against Buffalo is pointless because this is a different unit. Talking about how Clemson performed offensively against LSU is pointless because yall will field a different unit. Anybody that trys to apply the transitive property to college football is just whistling Dixie. Each game is a microcosm with it's own variables.
The Georgia defense that Clemson will play will be young and hungry, ready to make a name for themselves. yeah, we will probably look silly in the secondary on repeated occasions. But our OLB's are hell on wheels. And our line is deep and talented. Last year we were just talented but our depth sucked. I really think were gonna put a beating on Boyd that he will feel for a month. I'm not overly worried about the defense we will put on the field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18394
Joined: 2/2/03
|
I wouldn't think that your expectations, regarding UGA's
Aug 25, 2013, 10:09 AM
|
|
D, to be any different than what you express. Yet, you think that we should be concerned about our O, replacing RB and TE. Our O will be much more cohesive, than it's ever been.
Why can you guys have great expectations and we cannot? WHY?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I wouldn't think that your expectations, regarding UGA's
Aug 25, 2013, 10:17 AM
|
|
Thats exactly what I've been trying to point out. I agree that just because a unit replaces players doesn't necessarily mean they will be worse. But thats the exact double logic that is used on this forum. Virtually every thread contains the logic that UGA replaces a ton of starters on defense and in turn will not be as good. No mention of applying that same logic to the Clemson offense.
Reality is that BOTH of these units will probably struggle in Game 1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rookie [17]
TigerPulse: 20%
Posts: 46
Joined: 8/12/13
|
Reality and logic do not exist in the clemson...
Aug 25, 2013, 10:22 AM
|
|
vocabulary. Dillusion is the by-word when talking any sport involving clemson athletics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18394
Joined: 2/2/03
|
w t f is dillusion?
Aug 25, 2013, 10:24 AM
|
|
You gotta be a coot. Get the #### outta here!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Delusional? This coming from the Alabama mouthed, Vandy
Aug 25, 2013, 1:00 PM
[ in reply to Reality and logic do not exist in the clemson... ] |
|
trophy case USuC? Is that not the epitome of delusional? I remember last year, fans of other SEC teams making fun of USuC for their arrogance. Your presence in collegiate football is a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18394
Joined: 2/2/03
|
But see, here's the deal...
Aug 25, 2013, 10:23 AM
[ in reply to Re: I wouldn't think that your expectations, regarding UGA's ] |
|
we do not replace a bunch of starters, on either side of the ball. More especially, on the O side. And, that's the match-up that everybody's looking at.
I have seen a small amount of admission, that we may very well be able to slow the dwags' offense. Any admission that the dwags will slow CU's offense is, well, delusional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: But see, here's the deal...
Aug 25, 2013, 10:28 AM
|
|
You dont consider replacing the #1 receiver, #1 TE, #1 RB and your center a big deal? I think thats kinda delusional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18394
Joined: 2/2/03
|
You really have no idea how our offense works, do you?
Aug 25, 2013, 10:31 AM
|
|
I think biggest loss is at center. A lot of leadership there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: You really have no idea how our offense works, do you?
Aug 25, 2013, 10:39 AM
|
|
It's a spread...big deal. I know exactly how your offense works. Hopkins to Watkins isn't a huge drop off. Ellington to McDowell is. Ford to Steckinger is as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11208]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18394
Joined: 2/2/03
|
Re: You really have no idea how our offense works, do you?
Aug 25, 2013, 11:02 AM
|
|
You don't know squat about Seckinger. Our coaches say he will be fine. That's all I know. That's all you know too.
Watkins doesn't even play the same role as Hopkins did. Shows just how little you do know, about our "spread". I'd even venture to say that Watkins freshman season had as much to do with Hopkin's numbers last year, as anything else. That and, Hopkins was/is a beast of a receiver.
Hot Rod will be fine. We have more depth, at the RB position. One man ain't gonna tote that load anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devotee [344]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 572
Joined: 7/28/13
|
Re: Re: But see, here's the deal...
Aug 25, 2013, 10:40 AM
[ in reply to Re: But see, here's the deal... ] |
|
That's where u r so wrong yet again. I like Ellington but I never saw him as great. I think he will be replaced ok. Nuk is gone and he was great but our other receivers are really good too. Better than I think u even remotely realize. And had nuk not been all world, u would seen the others stats be better. And Sammy Watkins is easily the man to carry the load. Not to mention that I'd argue that most all of our current receivers would start at UGA right now. Lol.
And there is the TE position. Yes we need someone to step up but I trust that will happen. But they way u talk, it's like we lost 8 on o or something and we r scrambling to find people. That's silly. Losing almost your entire d is a huge deal. Geez , even when u had them all u gave up 44 to Tennessee and Kentucky almost beat you. So take away 8 or 9 starters and you figure it's game 1, on the road in Death Valley, against tajh????? Well, you might need to stock up on Tylenol as part of your snacky foods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [35206]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6908
Joined: 7/2/13
|
Re: Re: But see, here's the deal...
Aug 25, 2013, 12:11 PM
[ in reply to Re: But see, here's the deal... ] |
|
Yup, our big center is gone. So is your big NG Geathers. His replacement NG Thornton has 2 career tackles and 0 starts. And you have a new DE, Sterling Bailey who has 1 tackle. And if you start DE Ray Drew well he has 13 solo tacks but no sacks in 12.
Only 4 players who are listed as D starters have a career start. Your CB Swann is the only DB to start a game. Ya gotta figure replacing Ramboo with Matthews is a major drop; especially since he's a true freshman.
I've thumbed the rest of the DBs as well. All I see are JUCO transfers and guys who have never recorded a stat. So pretty much you return a DE, a few LBs, and one CB. Everyone else gets broken into CFB in Death Valley on Saturday... just saying.
Also, McDowell is no rookie. He's been around. It's not like were introducing a true fresh back there. Unlike your defensive back field. Besides, a veteran group is there to pave the way for R.M. Sure we'll miss Nuke. But isn't your No.1 gone to? In Tavarres King? And sorry but our #2 beats yours anytime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Devotee [344]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 572
Joined: 7/28/13
|
Re: Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 10:11 AM
[ in reply to Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
So u think on o we field a different unit? Wow. How uninformed. I hope the rest of the UGA team feels like you do. And I don't care about your d from last year and who talked to who. From the looks of your schedule, they weren't that great. And most of them are gone. So...... I'm really not feeling your resurgence. And of course our d struggled . Lol everyone knows that. Who doesn't? But we pulled it together late and we get most them back. HUGE difference. And to act like we lost several key players on o and u don't think we will b as good is a statement from a UGA fan who has no idea about Clemson football. My guess is we will be better on o. Sure we are hunting a tight end we feel good about but other than that, I have zero concerns there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2839]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4656
Joined: 1/7/12
|
Re: Georgia Defense.....
Aug 25, 2013, 3:12 PM
[ in reply to Re: Georgia Defense..... ] |
|
Ok well we can say the same things. Your linebackers are "hell on wheels" and your front four is "deep and talented" but none of them have any experience so don't discount Clemson when we say replacing Nuk Hopkins with Charone Peake and Martavis Bryant is a bad thing. Some people are saying Clemson's offense will suck because we lost Hopkins even though we have a ton of talent behind him, but Georgia's defense will be even better because they lost 8 starters. That makes no sense at all. We lost Nuk to the first round and still have an incredibly deep receiving corps. We lost Ellington at RB but McDowell and Brooks are very talented as well. We can all sit here and argue about how awesome our newcomers are but none of us are strapping on the helmet on Saturday, all we can do is watch and hope our new guys play like we think they will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3798]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/7/02
|
Silliest thread ever...
Aug 25, 2013, 12:49 PM
|
|
Saturdays game will feature new starters on both teams. Last years stats DO NOT MATTER. The game will be decided by UGAs ability to keep Clemson's O off the field which means Clemson's D has to stop the running game. Last years stats mean nothing. It's all about Saturday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 79
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
