re: Been reading some Clemson message boards..cocky bunch still.

quote:

---

I don't think it is so much about injuries as simple physical punishment. Playing against NFL D-lineman which exist in bunches on every team in the SEC is much different then playing against the future lawyers, coaches and school teachers playing the same position at many other conference schools. The Dline is the main difference between the SEC and other conferences.

---

On average the SEC might have 4 more draft picks on a roster compared to the other power five teams. Let's say for argument sake that it's more heavily weighted on the DL, I am being generous saying that the average SEC DL has one more pro prospect than an average power 5 school.

The argument really becomes tricky when you consider that you play an 8 game conference schedule vs a 9 game schedule and you're getting a patsy, usually scheduled at the end of the season.

They need to give credit to Saban and his recruiting. They did play as well as they could have and they played a great game but unfortunately nobody can match what Saban puts on the field from a talent perspective and they know it. It's literally insane how deep Bama is. On paper Alabama shouldn't lose to anybody based on talent alone.

I'm an LSU fan, and I hate Alabama. With that being said, that was the best National Championship Bama has played in my opinion. It was a great game to watch, and both teams looked like they deserved to be there. That was Bama's best win in the National Championship. Still hate y'all though, sorry, it's in my blood

quote:

---

This is not how the game was perceived outside your camp. Impartial fans thought Clemson lost the game due to mental gaffes. Onside kicks, a kick return on a lousy kick, and busted coverages. At the end of the day, Bama deserves credit but no is thinking Clemson looked like a two score differential team.

---

Those are not impartial fans. They sound like Anti-Bama fans.

These people think mental gaffes cost Clemson? Were they watching the first half where Coker looked as if he didn't know what sport he was playing? Three straight drives Bama had a solid 1st down play and Coker took them backwards about ten yards on 2nd down, killing the drive.

The onside kick was coaching. Just like when Miles pulled the fake FG against UF this year. He got McElwain on that play and it was the differential in the game. Miles earned that. Maybe these people should recognize Saban won that battle.

Clemson got blocked and ran themselves out of their lanes on the kickoff return. In other words, they got beat. Not sure how that return is some sort of excuse for them.

Clemson got schemed, out-maneuvered by Kiffin, and too preoccupied with Henry - that's what prompted the coverage failures. On each play you can see it. For example, the safety crept closer to the LOS for run support and not once did he even acknowledge Bama had 2 on 1 to his left. That's what happens when Henry is in the backfield. That also helps explain why it was so hard for Henry to run between the tackles. Most of the game Clemson was almost exclusively focused on the run. Just like defenses want to make an offense one-dimensional, offenses want to force a defense to focus too much on one thing, thereby becoming one-dimensional on defense.

I do think Bama is 2 scores better than Clemson. The only uncharacteristic play was Coker in the 1st half taking all those sacks. If he does his normal thing and throws it away, Bama probably gets another TD in the 1st half. Clemson played well and they're good team. But that program isn't yet ready for a title.

they can talk all they want while we sit and polish the golden vag.

quote:

---

they can talk all they want while we sit and polish the golden vag.

---

Lol yeah!

I think it is just them rationalizing. It must suck to have waited so long and then fall short.

Do not get me wrong, screw Clemson. I can just see how they are trying to console themselves.

One thing I have noticed about Alabama with Kiffin that seems very different to me is that the Alabama offense really tries to hit the "big play" more. In the past, I remember them more focused on just methodically driving down the field, eating clock.

Also, I am not sure Clemson can make it back. They cannot survive a loss in the ACC, I think Alabama could survive a loss and still play. They did a great job rebuilding their defense this year, but they will be in the same predicament again next year.

From the perspective of a non-Bama fan that nevertheless has a fondness for Bama, I don't understand why the answer can't be both "Bama played an inspired game" and "Clemson fought to the bitter end". Like, you know, virtually every other hardfought close game. Bama wasn't gifted its game-planning, which was frequently excellent and did a great job of adjusting as Clemson adjusted. Clemson didn't get lucky -- they put considerable effort and managed to get their Heisman-quality QB fully involved in all aspects of the offense as well as managing to cover and slow down Bama's two primary offensive weapons coming into the game (they stuck on Ridley like white on rice, and slowly started closing the gaps to minimize Henry's ability to get free as the game wore on.)

Really, most fans who just like great football saw two teams going at it hammer and tongs and enjoyed every minute of it.

quote:

---

So, what does that say about your team than?

---

mediocre

To be honest, I have seen more venom from Ohio State fans about this year's title game, and how Ohio State would have beat both Clemson and Alabama than any fanbase. I get that they were great last year and won the national title, but they lost to frickin Michigan State, who we blew out in the playoffs, so what are they even on about?