Started By
Message
re: Clemson is sure glad OJ Howard is at the combine
Posted on 3/9/17 at 12:32 pm to Tillman
Posted on 3/9/17 at 12:32 pm to Tillman
quote:
speaking of depth, many Bama fans blame the loss on Scarborough being injured, so isn't that that an admission at a lack of depth at RB? or the O-line isn't very good. lol
Not a Bama fan. Just able to objectively view what happened on the field. Im sure Bama fans have vomited out every reason under the sun for why they lost, their fan base, like all of college football's, has a lot of idiots. You're a stunning example of Clemson's. Perhaps your blind partisanship made it too hard to see, but the play calling on both sides and Deshaun Watson's composure and overall skill at the qb position were the deciding factors of the game. Bama's QB completed 1/3 of his passes while the running game was cranking out 7 yards a pop. And before you say Scarborough, the rest of the ball carriers were cranking out the same ypc. Sarkisian's predictable run, pass, run, pass play calling resulted in running the ball only 34 times and passing the ball 32 times.
Noticed how Clemson mixed up running the ball when Bama Gallman down? Yeah, that's what a competent coordinator is capable of.
66 plays to 99?? That's insane. That's horrendous play calling. Simply put, When Bama lined up and ran the ball they averaged 7 yards a carry. They run the ball, they hold onto the ball, they don't put themselves in 3rd and long by passing on early downs, they keep the ball out of Deshaun Watson's hands and they win the game. NO competent coordinator continues to pass the ball at the same rate as rushing when the running game is giving you 7 yards a play and passing the ball is resulting in incompletions 2 out of 3 tries. Clemson scored with 1 second left, if Bama runs the ball, literally, a couple more times and they run out the clock. That's it. End of discussion. If bama sticks to the run game they not only win but win by multiple touchdowns.
1
Posted on 3/9/17 at 12:35 pm to Tillman
quote:
the truth is Watson didn't play that great in several games to start the season to include at Auburn. Our defense won that game. Watson's interceptions played a big role in Pitt winning at Clemson and almost cost us the game against Lville and NC State.
Look at you you're discrediting the greatest player in the history of your program to better serve your flawed and idiotic points. In the immortal words of Terrell Owens, "That's your quarterback man!" My god that's your qb man! My opinions don't discredit your championship. There is no asterisk next to the trophy that states 'Yeah, Clemson won but Sarkisian called an awful game' but, objectively speaking, that and Deshaun Watson's playmaking ability is the reason Clemson won the game.
The fact you throw one of the best QBs in the history of the game, and the only reason Clemson was even in the playoff to begin with, under the bus is disgusting on so many levels. I suggest you stop listening to the talking heads at ESPN and actually try to think for yourself, but until then, may God have mercy on your misguided soul.
Posted on 3/9/17 at 2:29 pm to TheJimBrown7
i'm not dissing Watson, I'm being objective about him. you act like he catches the ball, plays on the o-line, etc. It is a team sport. have you ever watched a football game?
you turning yourself into pretzels to make the case Alabama was a better team. again, you talk about all this depth but then you guys say Bama lost b/c Scarborough got hurt. where was the depth at RB?
only reason you are praising Watson is to diss Clemson's team in general. you are so phony.
CLemson had 4 WRs with 90 plus yards, and you are saying it was all QB. lol Alabama's offense was 2 out of 15 on 3rd down but you say it it was all Watson. lol
you turning yourself into pretzels to make the case Alabama was a better team. again, you talk about all this depth but then you guys say Bama lost b/c Scarborough got hurt. where was the depth at RB?
only reason you are praising Watson is to diss Clemson's team in general. you are so phony.
CLemson had 4 WRs with 90 plus yards, and you are saying it was all QB. lol Alabama's offense was 2 out of 15 on 3rd down but you say it it was all Watson. lol
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 2:32 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 2:34 pm to TheJimBrown7
if Clemson doesn't have two turnovers to Bama's 0, Clemson wins easily. we can do this what if thing all night. i never thought CU could beat Bama if CU lost the turnover margin.
you are obviously bitter that Clemson beat Bama yet you say you aren't an Alabama fan. lol
Isn't playcalling part of the game, part of being a good team? You are saying Bama was better despite admitting Clemson had better playcalling. lol that makes no sense.
Kiffen's play calling didn't look that good in the Washington game. I would say Bama's offense probably looked better against Clemson than Washington. it scored more against Clemson than against LSU when Bama still had Kiffen.
you are obviously bitter that Clemson beat Bama yet you say you aren't an Alabama fan. lol
Isn't playcalling part of the game, part of being a good team? You are saying Bama was better despite admitting Clemson had better playcalling. lol that makes no sense.
Kiffen's play calling didn't look that good in the Washington game. I would say Bama's offense probably looked better against Clemson than Washington. it scored more against Clemson than against LSU when Bama still had Kiffen.
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 2:39 pm to skrayper
quote:
LOL, no we don't. We're not Clemson, blaming the loss of one player at a non-QB position for a loss.
speak for yourself. i've seen Bama fans do just that on this forum.
last year, CU was without Mike Williams and Deon Cain at WR, and McKensie ALexander at CB couldn't play in the 2nd half. Shaq Lawson played but was not 100 percent after being hurt in the Okla game. CU should have still won it despite this though. special teams was that team's achilles heel all season.
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 2:57 pm to Tillman
The depth at RB was there, Sarkisian didn't call enough running plays. Sorry that simple statement crushes the world you know. The other ball carriers for Bama ran for 120 on 18 carries. Feed them the ball more and they win the game. Yeah thanks I'm aware the game of football is played with 11 players but if you don't realize how important Watson is to your team you clearly don't understand how the game is played. You can throw as many box score stats as you want out there but it was Watson making clutch throw after clutch throw, scrambling, throwing on the run, no big deal just stuff that 99% of college qbs don't do against Bama. Clemson is an 8-4 team without Watson last year you can make all the "points" you want and claim to be objective but you are clearly a blind homer. I'm not a Bama fan, a huge Watson fan tho, I was thrilled Clemson won but believe whatever you want if you can't accept that people other than Bama fans think Bama is an overall more talented team than Clemson, that's on you man, not me. I detest Bama but know enough about college football to know these two teams are not similar in talent. Just because you can't accept the fact that there were other factors your mind can't comprehend in determining the outcome of the game doesn't mean I'm an Alabama fan. But honestly, believe whatever you want. Clearly you barking about Bama's running back depth over and over again when I haven't mentioned it once shows you've been message board dueling all over the place so there's really nothing more I can say. With Clemson being as elite as you say they are they will be easily be back in the title game next season. Won't miss a beat after losing their best player in history. See you then.
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:01 pm to TheJimBrown7
is Alabama, Florida State, OSU in the tile game every year? i think you would call those elite programs but they not in the title game every year.
lol
i've never described Clemson as an 'elite' program. the best teams vary from season to season.
i don't agree Bama was more talented team. I think CLemson was much better at WR, for example. Clemson put up more yards on Bama than many ACC teams gave up to Clemson.
i don't think there is any evidence Clemson would be 8-4 last year without Watson. if you consider the NC State game was only close because of Watson's pick 6, and as I've poined out, his mistakes in the Pitt game cost CU that game, and almost cost CU the Lville game.
you are so eager to brown nose Alabama that you view Watson as some kind of perfect QB but he did make mistakes including in the Bama game.
i would say Clemson would have struggled more without Gallman than without Watson last year. Part of the reason the NC State game was clsoe is they knocked out Gallman early.
lol
i've never described Clemson as an 'elite' program. the best teams vary from season to season.
i don't agree Bama was more talented team. I think CLemson was much better at WR, for example. Clemson put up more yards on Bama than many ACC teams gave up to Clemson.
i don't think there is any evidence Clemson would be 8-4 last year without Watson. if you consider the NC State game was only close because of Watson's pick 6, and as I've poined out, his mistakes in the Pitt game cost CU that game, and almost cost CU the Lville game.
you are so eager to brown nose Alabama that you view Watson as some kind of perfect QB but he did make mistakes including in the Bama game.
i would say Clemson would have struggled more without Gallman than without Watson last year. Part of the reason the NC State game was clsoe is they knocked out Gallman early.
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 3:12 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:03 pm to Tillman
Cliffs on this thread, please. Wtf was OP about?
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:13 pm to Tillman
quote:
It is a team sport. have you ever watched a football game?
Yep. And from all your previous statements I can garauntee I played at a higher level than you have. Like the constant comparison of other games. Football is not defined by the transitive property just because Team A scored this many on team B doesn't mean anything. Comparing the LSU scores and Pittsburgh game has absolutely nothing to do with the title game. This is not math. The transitive property isn't applied in football but since you are clearly a child I figure you probably can't comprehend what the transitive property is anyways. Only someone who knows nothing about actually playing the game and is a box score stat junkie would consider the transitive property. I'll be looking forward to seeing Clemson in the title game next season without Watson.
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:15 pm to TheJimBrown7
your premise seems to be that if Clemson is not in the title game last year, it is only because of Watson not being there.
CU is losing many players on offense in addition to Watson, to include RB Gallman, TE Leggett, WRs Mike WIlliams and Artavius Scott. Lost some good players on defense including Boelware.
so if CLemson doesn't do as well next year, that isn't proof this year's team was only successful because of Watson.
What will you say if Bama isn't in the title game next year? will you keep talking about they have more depth and are better than the teams in the title game? lol
CU is losing many players on offense in addition to Watson, to include RB Gallman, TE Leggett, WRs Mike WIlliams and Artavius Scott. Lost some good players on defense including Boelware.
so if CLemson doesn't do as well next year, that isn't proof this year's team was only successful because of Watson.
What will you say if Bama isn't in the title game next year? will you keep talking about they have more depth and are better than the teams in the title game? lol
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 3:19 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:37 pm to Tillman
Already making excuses I see. So where's the bar set man? If Clemson wins 11 games Watson wasn't as important as he was but if they win 8 than it's because y'all lose so many playmakers? Ohio State has already done it. So has Bama. Both teams have lost their QBs and a plethora of playmakers and gone on to win a championship a year later. Because both programs have elite depth. If Clemson is so similar in talent like you said than they should pull it off next year. What the hell is a "perfect player" I don't play Madden and create characters with 99 overall rating, tho I get a sneaky suspicion you do, I don't know what this "perfect player" description your saying is. I'm aware Watson is a mortal who makes mistakes but I'm also aware that he is without a doubt one of the best QBs to ever play the game but Clemson is mad talented and will for sure not miss a beat, or they will, your opinion suggests Clemson will both be reloading and great next year and also will struggle with losing so many playmakers so get back to me when you decide on which one but idk I guess it depends on how you're feeling lmk
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:38 pm to Vecchio Cane
No one knows anymore.
Basically Clemson sucks and the only reason they won is because DW is the greatest QB to have ever donned a uniform. Alabama would have easily won if they never passed the ball. Only player on Clemson's team with any talent, and they'll be lucky to break .500 next year.
And elite teams make the playoffs every year.
Basically Clemson sucks and the only reason they won is because DW is the greatest QB to have ever donned a uniform. Alabama would have easily won if they never passed the ball. Only player on Clemson's team with any talent, and they'll be lucky to break .500 next year.
And elite teams make the playoffs every year.
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:45 pm to Tillman
quote:
our premise seems to be that if Clemson is not in the title game last year,
Nope, my premise is Clemson is an 8-4 team without Watson last season. Just like Georgia in 1980 is probably a 8-4 team without Herschel Walker. Virginia Tech in 99 is probably a 9-3 team without Vick. And Texas is probably 10-2 without Vince Young in 05. There are overall elite talented championship teams, and there are good teams with once in a decade type talent that takes them to the promised land. It's not like it deminishes the championship it's just clearly obvious Clemson doesn't sniff the playoff without Watson.
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:46 pm to TheJimBrown7
i don't think it will be the end of the world if Clemson has 3 or 4 losses next year after losing like 85 percent of our offense from the past few seasons.
if Alabama is superior in talent, why couldn't they stop Watson? you just making excuses. they lost the game but you searching for a way to give it them anyway.
if Alabama has more depth, you think their defense would have done a better job on Watson than ACC defenses did. i doubt we had 4 different WR with 90 plus yards against ACC teams. lol
if Alabama is superior in talent, why couldn't they stop Watson? you just making excuses. they lost the game but you searching for a way to give it them anyway.
if Alabama has more depth, you think their defense would have done a better job on Watson than ACC defenses did. i doubt we had 4 different WR with 90 plus yards against ACC teams. lol
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 3:55 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:48 pm to Vecchio Cane
The Jim Brown doesn't have a team so I'm not sure what his beef is with Hillman. Far as I can tell from skimmin' a post or two.
Sorry, meant Tillman.
Sorry, meant Tillman.
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 3:49 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:49 pm to bigDgator
he's a Alabama brown noser. you see a lot of bama groupies these days. lol
i think what bothers them is Alabama is something they thought t hey could count on, Bama would always win.
And Clemson flipped the script this year. they don't like this unpredictability.
if i was an Alabama fan, and had witnessed 4 recent titles, i couldn't get worked up over losing one to a good Clemson team. how many times do you need to see the same movie. but these Bama fans are so greedy. lol
i think what bothers them is Alabama is something they thought t hey could count on, Bama would always win.
And Clemson flipped the script this year. they don't like this unpredictability.
if i was an Alabama fan, and had witnessed 4 recent titles, i couldn't get worked up over losing one to a good Clemson team. how many times do you need to see the same movie. but these Bama fans are so greedy. lol
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 3:54 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:51 pm to Tillman
Oh gotcha, he is rustled for sure then, carry on.
Posted on 3/9/17 at 4:00 pm to Tillman
Hahaha enjoy it now champ because like my original post said Clemson will not be back. Maybe another 35 years haha
Posted on 3/9/17 at 4:02 pm to TheJimBrown7
one in my lifetime is good enough. :) i'm not greedy. Clemson going to win more than its fair share of games.
it won't be shocking if Clemson is back in playoffs next year if you consider the other ACC teams lost QBs and other good players on offense this season, and Clemson has FSU at home. CLemson actually has an easier schedule this coming season than the past season, with G Tech, FSU and Auburn all at home.
i'm excited about the possiblity CU may have a running QB this year and a more run based offense in general.
it won't be shocking if Clemson is back in playoffs next year if you consider the other ACC teams lost QBs and other good players on offense this season, and Clemson has FSU at home. CLemson actually has an easier schedule this coming season than the past season, with G Tech, FSU and Auburn all at home.
i'm excited about the possiblity CU may have a running QB this year and a more run based offense in general.
This post was edited on 3/9/17 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 3/9/17 at 4:05 pm to Tillman
Fair enough
Page 6 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News