|
Replies: 42
| visibility 1
|
Orange Blooded [2818]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2186
Joined: 9/22/15
|
So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 6:14 PM
|
|
And this narrative that we were "manhandled" and "dominated" is false. It's simply untrue.
Of course our offense was stymied, but so was there's. Our defense came to play and to win and the stats show it.
Even just an average performance from the offense would have won the game. The difference is they went virtually unpenalized and won the turnover and field position battles. Everything else was a wash.
16 first downs to 14 first downs
261 yards to 188
32 minutes TOP to 28
The offense got smacked in the mouth, yes, but our team was not "manhandled". That's ######## and uninformed.
The two interceptions for Bama won this game. Period. If you take those away we are having a much different conversations right now given the way our defense was playing them.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Guru [1736]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1523
Joined: 10/17/13
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 6:16 PM
|
|
I agree somewhat however I was at the game and their DL vs our OL was a mismatch all game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2818]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2186
Joined: 9/22/15
|
No doubt about it, but If we had pushed the game to 10-9 or
Jan 6, 2018, 6:20 PM
|
|
13-10 in our favor and forced them to drive a long field, the stats show that it was heavily in our favor we would probably have forced a punt and gotten the ball back with every ounce of momentum and possibly even the lead.
Momentum is something that can't be measured in football but can't be overstated. That interception and huge return just absolutely sucked the life out of our team. All of the momentum we had worked so hard to gain up until that point had been completely nullified in one play and a matter of seconds.
I've watched a lot of football. For all we know if we had gone down and gotten points there it may have put us in the zone. But give Bama credit their guy made the play and ours didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7831]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20489
Joined: 10/9/04
|
Ifs and buts we’re candy and nuts
Jan 6, 2018, 6:29 PM
|
|
I’d have a winning lottery ticket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7831]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20489
Joined: 10/9/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15866]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7660
Joined: 12/4/06
|
Re: Ifs and buts we’re candy and nuts
Jan 6, 2018, 7:52 PM
|
|
IMO it’s good to for the coaches, players and fans to reflect on the Bama / Clemson game and to discuss the if’s and butts’ of the game.
Many of you on T-Net have made excellent points in your post game comments. These discussions are a great way to help the fans heal and work through a big game loss. I have learned so much from many of other T-netters post evaluations and opinions about the game.
I don’t see any value in post that are spiteful and full of negative comments. Or blaming specific individuals for this loss.
Tiger Nation should be excited with the future of our program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2883]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2224
Joined: 3/7/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7831]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 20489
Joined: 10/9/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2371]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1997
Joined: 11/7/14
|
If wishes were horses, we'd all ride to work...
Jan 6, 2018, 8:50 PM
[ in reply to No doubt about it, but If we had pushed the game to 10-9 or ] |
|
The Tiger offense just couldn't get it going... I was there... And I can tell you that the MAIN reason the O couldn't get it going was the 11 guys in white shirts on the opposite side of the LoS. We sometimes tend to blame too much on our guys, instead of giving credit to the other team. Truth told, Bama WON the game... we didn't LOSE it.
We will be back, and we will learn from this.
Proud of my Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1653]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1819
Joined: 12/9/15
|
Re: If wishes were horses, we'd all ride to work...
Jan 7, 2018, 2:46 PM
|
|
so your saying we had no chance because Bama was just that much better? I disagree based on talent alone, right tackle was an issue. There is a lot of review and correction to make. ETN pass blocking looked like a little kid. KB not feeling the pressure and moving the pocket. Drops, Drops and Drops. D spent nearly the entire first half on the field and still we were with 7. Get the break 1st play of the 2d half and go backward. Still had a chance after that, have the play to take the lead and what? Arm bar, pop up and an Int. with 15 added for good measure. If its not your day its not your day. Was not our day. Proud of the Tigers and hope they (and us) learn to never take it for granted, you got to earn it. On to next year, there is one more scholarship open now that RRM has declared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [28]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 108
Joined: 9/23/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Cub [10]
TigerPulse: 10%
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/5/18
|
Re: No doubt about it, but If we had pushed the game to 10-9 or
Jan 7, 2018, 12:37 PM
[ in reply to No doubt about it, but If we had pushed the game to 10-9 or ] |
|
I understand what you're trying to do, but this just makes us collectively look foolish like the coots and everybody ELSE we make fun of. Stop it already!!
Let's just admit we WERE manhandled and hope to God TL is the second coming of DW.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1776]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2564
Joined: 3/15/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9889]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7076
Joined: 3/6/05
|
We could play that game tomorrow and win
Jan 6, 2018, 8:44 PM
[ in reply to Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game ] |
|
But on that night we had no chance. They whipped us. That's the bottom line.
If we laced it up again this weekend, who knows. Maybe we have a harder edge, maybe they have less. I don't think it is a matter of jimmy's and joe's.....we match up man to man with Bama.
But that night...we were not going to win. I could tell that midway through 2nd QTR.
Time to move on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55664]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 35262
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Even simpler: If Cain makes that 3rd down catch early.
Jan 6, 2018, 6:17 PM
|
|
Totally different ballgame.
But he did not.
And their D played with their ears pinned back the whole game.
Props to them. They created the problems we experienced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Agree ... that was the type of play that changes ball games
Jan 6, 2018, 8:40 PM
|
|
In no way would I load the entire loss on Cain, but he had a couple of blown chances to be "Legendary" and help get us out of the shadow of our own goal line where we spent the majority of the game.
In retrospect though, even when we had the ball in good field position we couldn't do anything offensively.
Getting the fumble right away in the 2nd half trailing by only 7 and not converting it into a TD was the prime example.
Not even being able to score a garbage time TD in the Red Zone at the end was another.
The entire offense needs to bear the blame for the loss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2371]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1997
Joined: 11/7/14
|
You might want to put a little more of the "blame" on
Jan 6, 2018, 8:53 PM
|
|
Bama's defense, and a little less on the Tiger offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6153]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4043
Joined: 2/15/11
|
You would call that credit, not blame.
Jan 6, 2018, 9:49 PM
|
|
But, it's certainly all a matter of perspective.
I thought our offense was simply overwhelmed for 90% of the game and it was the Bama defense doing to overwhelming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3290]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4049
Joined: 1/3/14
|
Re: Agree ... that was the type of play that changes ball games
Jan 7, 2018, 9:12 AM
[ in reply to Agree ... that was the type of play that changes ball games ] |
|
And why didn't we score a TD? Maybe a hold on Higgins' arm that caused him to come down wrong and injure his leg? Ball at the 2 in a 10-3 game?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Agree ... that was the type of play that changes ball games
Jan 7, 2018, 9:41 AM
|
|
Agree that we had some tough non-calls and that was one of them.
That was yet another of the type of plays that changes ball games ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [93]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 138
Joined: 7/15/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67718]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115417
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 6:17 PM
|
|
D worked their way into the game. But the O never did. They were pushed around, shut down and, looked scared. It is painful to admit but true
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16227]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12771
Joined: 11/14/09
|
Been a lousy week since but you are absolutely correct.
Jan 6, 2018, 6:24 PM
|
|
261 yards of offense allowed. 10-6 score mid-3rd quarter. We stifled their offense. We make a few plays that were missed and it's a completely different ballgame quick. No moral victory for sure, but we kicked their butts pretty good too in that game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1571]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1857
Joined: 9/8/02
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 6:25 PM
|
|
Let's not fool ourselves about that game. the only reason the stats
were not off the chart was the fact that the Bamma Bums did not have to drive it
very far to score. If they had a longer field they would have had that much
more offensive yardage. WE got our butts kicked accept it and move forward to
next year when we return to final four again. Look it was a bad night but we have nothing
to be ashamed of this was another incredible year and I can't wait for next year.
Trying to figure out how to swallow that bad game is not easy but just flush it and move on.
GO TIGERS!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2818]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2186
Joined: 9/22/15
|
Really? You honestly believe that?
Jan 6, 2018, 6:33 PM
|
|
Haha pretty interesting. I feel literally the complete opposite.
For a team that had to run an illegal trick pick play with a defensive lineman to score one of their only offensive scores, you sure are confident they would have carved our defense up if only given a longer field?
I'm the opposite. I'm of the belief that if they had been forced to drive longer fields then we would have forced more punts and got the ball back more frequently and in better field position. Nothing about that game and the way our defense handled them would lead me to believe a longer field would have left to MORE success for them. That's preposterous. Venables was severely limited in his playbook all night by being continually pinned with their backs against the wall and still stifled Bama repeatedly.
They couldn't get anything going under literally THE most favorable conditions, so I'm not sure how worsening those conditions would have improved their play?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1797]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 1387
Joined: 11/1/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6153]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4043
Joined: 2/15/11
|
That totally devalues the significance of field position
Jan 6, 2018, 9:55 PM
[ in reply to Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game ] |
|
If field position had been reversed, the chances are that Bama is punting a lot more than they did and we're the ones fielding punts at mid-field repeatedly.
The Bama offense was aggressive and loose because they had great field position for almost the entire game while we spent the game playing cautious because of where we were on the field.
I absolutely disagree that the Bama offense regularly drives the length of the field against our defense.
They had a hard enough time scoring from mid-field and the only time the game got out of hand was when we started giving them turnovers near our red zone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Team Captain [460]
TigerPulse: 79%
Posts: 922
Joined: 10/29/05
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 6:48 PM
|
|
Not sure about manhandled but it wasn't that close. A lot of those yards came in garbage time when they backed off and we drained the clock on ourselves. Yes, I agree, turnovers are bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58379]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46316
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Again, for the first time all year, we missed DW
Jan 6, 2018, 6:50 PM
|
|
and Mike Williams and Jordan Leggett. Yes, our O-line got whooped, but you're right, it wasn't an overall manhandling or domination. We just didn't have anybody that could do what those 3 did last year, and that's what beat us, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44000]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 32933
Joined: 2/22/03
|
If that makes you feel better, then that's fine.
Jan 6, 2018, 6:52 PM
|
|
The game I saw involved one team which was clearly better than the other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16121]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26428
Joined: 11/18/03
|
We must have been watching the same game***
Jan 6, 2018, 7:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2371]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1997
Joined: 11/7/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2371]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1997
Joined: 11/7/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2371]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1997
Joined: 11/7/14
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [571]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 954
Joined: 12/17/17
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 6:56 PM
|
|
even without the turnovers, I still feel we would have lost. its not like the offensive line would have gotten better had we scored to make is 13-10. the play calling was really horrible. I cannot comprehend how we didn't take a single shot down the field (not including the attempt to Higgins that got unpenalized). that was how we needed to attack, be aggressive and spread the defense out to open up the run, but no. we went the short pass route with all the qb runs that were ineffective not including Bryant's 3rd and 13 scramble. whats the worst that can happen taking a shot down the field on 3rd and long? maybe get intercepted, which is in reality a punt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16121]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 26428
Joined: 11/18/03
|
It would have been an asswhiping if we beat them by 18
Jan 6, 2018, 7:08 PM
|
|
and that is simply the truth
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15866]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7660
Joined: 12/4/06
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 7:30 PM
|
|
I agree with you. Clemson was not overrun and manhandled by Bama at least the way all these ESPN and other Sports analysts have indicated. DW4Heisman made an excellent point about momentum. The interception really took energy away from the team and a some really bad officiating calls pushed the momentum to Bama. If those 2 calls possibly 3 penalty’s are called it may have taken momentum away from Bama, we may have scored and the outcome may have been much different. Instead Bama feed off of those non calls and the mistakes we made. One other point to make is Bama had an extra week of rest and extra time to prepare for Clemson.
This is something the committee must address some how. IMO an extra week of rest and preparation for a college football team this day and time is huge. It could have been the difference maker.
Regardless of the outcome of the Bama/Clemson game, every player and every coach as well as everyone involved with our football program should be congratulated for another successful season. And I am looking forward to the 2018 team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [992]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1528
Joined: 10/7/12
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 6, 2018, 8:15 PM
|
|
It is what it is. In the 2015 NC Game our O played well enough to win, but the D (and ST) didn't. This year the D played well enough to win; the O didn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2818]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2186
Joined: 9/22/15
|
Pretty much******
Jan 6, 2018, 8:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
~75 of Clemson's yards, 5-6 first downs came on the last...
Jan 6, 2018, 9:28 PM
|
|
drive, which was relative garbage time for Alabama.
The 6 minutes of clock eaten was what was most important to Saban and his defense as at 24-6, the clock was Rammer Jammer's best friend.
Clemson's defense played really well I thought considering how little KB2 and the offense offered in the way of help in the field position battle or in taking any real pressure off of BV's boys, but we saw Clemson's offense go into the tank several times this year, by design because Clemson's defense was throttling the opponent. Our OCs and Dabo said as much, running clock and protecting the ball, so if the Bama defense had been pressed, who knows what the Bama O might have been able to accomplish? Clemson's offense gave the Bama defense no such struggle.
18 plays in the last drive was 25% of the total Clemson ran for the game. 75 yards was 40% of Clemson's total for the game. 5-6 first downs was 36% of the 14 total.
At his current stage of development, KB2's peter principle was Alabama as they dared him to beat them through the air and he's simply not up to the task. I'm afraid UGA's attacking defense, Saban light, would have caused him as much trouble.
He improved tremendously since last year from all accounts, so hopefully he continues the climb.
If any chain of events was a window into KB2 and the O's woes, going backwards after recovering the fumble to start 2H might have been it. Dabo was livid KB2 tucked and ran on 3rd with 15 to go, never allowing the play to develop and running into the sack, giving up far too soon on the play downfield.
Great year and there's nothing wrong with being one of the top 4 teams in all of FBS, nothing at all - it should be celebrated, but Alabama's defense was not in any way intimidated by KB2's ability to hurt them consistently in the passing game.
[Suffocating: 10 within ~5 yards of LOS, 3rd and 8]
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10822]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9006
Joined: 12/8/02
|
we got manhandled bc of the instant 14 points we gave up.
Jan 6, 2018, 10:10 PM
|
|
It's perception
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2419]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 592
Joined: 3/5/07
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 7, 2018, 3:25 PM
|
|
Well stated. Both DLs played well. I still think the two turnovers were the difference
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Cub [10]
TigerPulse: 10%
Posts: 62
Joined: 1/5/18
|
Re: So I checked the game stats from the Alabama game
Jan 7, 2018, 5:01 PM
|
|
WE WERE MANHANDLED. BAMA IS BETTER THIS YEAR. LET'S JUST ACCEPT IT AND MOVE ON!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 42
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
