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
TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 15
| visibility 1

TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 8:01 AM

 
Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters

Clemson O-line had an up-and-down year after moving up four new starters and lining the depth chart with a young group. Full Story »


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 8:43 AM

Well there is problem. 13 freshmen and sophomores. Should be much improved next year.

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

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 9:12 AM

As a whole.....it was NOT pretty!
Sorry boys

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

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 9:57 AM

How do you give that train wreck a C? It's a gift to say anything above a D.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 10:21 AM

I'd go lower than a D. They sucked, pretty much all year. It really showed up in the last against OSU.

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

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 10:21 AM

It feels like a C is very generous. Just looking at our heights and weights along the Oline is a reminder that we are well behind championship caliber linemen. Is this a recruiting issue or a strength and conditioning issue?

Also, not a lot of experience behind those starters this year. I’m 100% behind Dabo’s no portal players philosophy but you have to wonder if this deficiency could create an exception?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 10:49 AM

I give them a B - and I stand by that.

They were good just not National Championship good. Those that want to grade down, well ok, but unnecessary. If they were being beaten by the Pitts, GT, UVA, then a C or less is merited. Otherwise, the issue is that they were not dominant against top 4 playoff teams. uggg.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 11:11 AM

The real measure is yardage by Etienne. He didnt come close to his yardage from last year. O-line play has always been an issue for us. We have been getting better than where we were before Dabo, but it still seems like we cant get over the hump. Look at linemen drafted. We arent close to some of the blue bloods. Those who do get drafted, dont stay long.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Agreed. No way when Etienne simply can't run does the O-Line


Jan 15, 2021, 11:53 AM

get any sort of B grade, minuses included.

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

The most telling stat I saw was...Yards BEFORE contact by ETN...


Jan 15, 2021, 12:04 PM

In 2019...4.5 yards

In 2020...2.2 yards

Again, that is before contact, and I don't think the blame for that is on ETN.

And less yards BEFORE contact probably translates to less yards after contact also, due to less momentum after the first hit! It's no wonder ETN's rushing yards were down significantly this year! And we never heard him once complain!

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

Re: Agreed. No way when Etienne simply can't run does the O-Line


Jan 15, 2021, 1:51 PM [ in reply to Agreed. No way when Etienne simply can't run does the O-Line ]

I disagree on one major front: WR attrition. If you were a DC and you had to pick between "new" WRs or the 2 time AAC POY to "stop" which would you pick? We say the DCs would keep to stopping the run over all else.

Without our deep threats, opposing Ds did sell out to the run (both to cover TL16 as well as ETN. Look at TL16 2019 rushing stats vs 2020. Down from 5.5 to 3.0. Even with designed TL runs, I don't think you can pin it all on the OLine. We can say that our OLine was not built for a run-first offense and I will agree. However, without a healthy WR corp, it made the opposing DC's job easier as to where to bet.

The other reason: Our pass protection from 19 to 20 was nearly identical. That is darn good. However, out YPC was identical from 2019.... that would seem like a good thing right? Almost. TL16 was much more efficient and accurate. TL16 raise his game but our YPC was flat. That tells me that something else was missing.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Different perspective


Jan 15, 2021, 4:53 PM

The reason ETNs numbers were so bad was because you could play press man and know TL would only have about 2 seconds to get the ball out due to the lack of protection. Look at the Sugar Bowl. Fields had 5-7 seconds to throw almost every down. Mid to deep routes take time but he had them. Safeties have to play further off the line and Sermon goes for 6-10 yards a clip.

This OL wasn’t average - they were truly poor. This is why ETN had to learn to catch or his yards per game would have been down 50-70%.

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgtbn_110.gif flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: I guess


Jan 15, 2021, 12:27 PM

the plan of subbing early in or halfway through the 3rd quarter of majority of games on the offensive line didn't help a lot from 2019 and 2020. I understand the thought process but sometimes it hurts on continuity with 1st team starters and game stamina body and mind. Hopefully this will reverse itself and prove beneficial for 2021.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 1:39 PM

This issue is talent...period...

The middle 3 of our OL was an atrocity.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." - Abraham Lincoln


Re: TNET: Final grades: Clemson O-line bench shortens after replacing four starters


Jan 15, 2021, 1:52 PM

Hard to read those grades and wonder if our best 5 linemen were in the game vs Buckeyes. Parks to RT and McFadden to LG, RG or C. Or Parks to LG or RG. Will be interesting to see the line changes in 2021.

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


D. Interior running game was nonexistent***


Jan 16, 2021, 6:01 PM



military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 15
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic