Kevin Steele (Clemson DC) on 680

BeerNutts said:
That wasn't my point. Of course they won't say it, but I don't believe there are any coaches who actually think our offense is "high school" like, and they aren't seriously worried about it. All DC's think like Steele, so don't be worried over it.
Click to expand...
If Patrick Nix can be an OC at not one, but two schools, then there's some DCs out there that don't know what they're doing. I want to play against them.
 
Allen Koholic said:
When's the last time you heard any coach, at any level, write off an opposing team. It's coach-speak. I enjoyed hearing coaches say last year that their team needed to play assignment football, because that meant they really didn't understand what we're doing. That was a canned answer. Hearing Steele compare our offense to UF's means he gets it. I like people not getting it more.

Even if the other team knows what's coming, when we execute, we can win. When the other team doesn't know what's coming and we execute, we end up rushing for half a mile on a Thursday night.
Click to expand...

Exactly. He also commented that our offense is simple BUT we execute it to such a high degree (like UF) makes it very hard to stop.
 
I am sure Clemson, and others, will try to execute defensively what other teams wanted to do...but did not always do well.

1) The DE's and DT's need to try and trick Nesbitt as to whether they are biting inside or out..a lot of movement...particularly the moment the ball is snapped. Easier said than done with the game moving quickly.
2) The DB's and LB's absolutely should not try to tackle our backs (which are firing out quickly) at or above the waist. They should simply get low and cut us at the knees. LSU did this very effectively on Dwyer and prevented the long gains. UGA did it poorly...hence long runs by Dwyer and Jones despite tacklers being there.
 
Yes, but if the opposing defenders can successfully tackle our backs low, then shouldn't we try to take advantage of some of that one on one coverage in the passing game?

Isn't this what we couldn't do so well (despite open receivers) in the LSU game? I didn't watch the whole game because of work.
 
JacketFanPCB said:
Yes, but if the opposing defenders can successfully tackle our backs low, then shouldn't we try to take advantage of some of that one on one coverage in the passing game?

Isn't this what we couldn't do so well (despite open receivers) in the LSU game? I didn't watch the whole game because of work.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt...a threat of a passing game will make our running game that much better.
 
CPJ= Master Yoda said:
Dabo did play under one of my all time best coaches list: Gene Stallings. He's been around coaches that do it right and I think he'll be a good coach one day, but like Curry said, opposing coaches will be playing checkers while PJ is playing chess.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what playing experience means. Broyles, Pepper and Curry all played under Dodd, but only Broyles was a great coach. And Stallings was no Dodd. While he did a great job at Bama, I don't see how he's an all-time great! :confused:

Swinney coached under Stallings for four years after playing for him. 3 years as a GA and one year as an assistant. And I'd agree that's really good experience.

However, his coaching resume after that is not confidence-inspiring. 4 years under Mike Dubose, 2 years selling real estate, 6 years under Tommy Bowden, and he's never been a coordinator. PJ has been a HC one more season than Swinney has been an assistant.

I don't think Swinney will be an Ed Orgeron or Bill Lewis level disaster, but I doubt he will raise the bar at Clemson, either. If he merely maintains the status quo, then PJ will dominate Clemson and close games will become less common.
 
Allen Koholic said:
If Patrick Nix can be an OC at not one, but two schools, then there's some DCs out there that don't know what they're doing. I want to play against them.
Click to expand...

Pat Nix knows 100x more about football than you or I. That doesn't make him a good OC though. I too would like to play against DC's who compare with Pat's OC skills.

But, it still has nothing to do with actually thinking DC's believe our offense is "High School" and would over-look us.
 
I think Clemson would be better with Steele as HC and Dabo employed as a used car salesman.
 
GTCrew said:
#1. History. The game has a history of being extremely competitive.
#2. 2008. The game was extremely competitive.
#3. Recrootin 2005 to present. Clemson has outstanding athletes.
#4. Very early game with no rest. 2008 we were "slow out of the gate" and while this is year 2 it is typical for teams to have rust early. If we score in the teens or low 20s we have little room for error.
#5. Pressure. Clemson will be underdogs. They will play loose and we could be tight playing as favorites on national TV. They may have "a chip on their shoulder" and may really be focused on this game. Lore says we play better as an underdog.
#6. New staff additions at Clemson. Dabo picked up a few coaches and they seem to be an impressive group and likely an upgrade.
Click to expand...

It is the first measuring stick game for us. Can we get the job done? Lots of chips on the table for the winner, both nationally and within the conference pecking order. In the past 30 years our track record in "make or break" games is not that stellar. If a new day has indeed dawned at the Flats, then, yes, we should win. But for those of us having seen this scenario before, there is, as you say, uneasiness.
 
Bored and this thread got me thinking about Clemson's opener (vs MTSU)....isn't Tony Franklin, the spread offense guru, MTSU's OC now? I'm sure he's out to prove he still knows how to coach and "his system" works after the debacle at Auburn (although the more I hear, the more I realize that there were a lot of things going against him from the get-go).

I wonder how easy it will be for Clemson to go from playing against a team that runs a system like that and who is no pushover, to playing against a system like ours (which will be much more polished since the last time we met) with only 5 days rest?


Regardless, Clemson always worries me. It's always a hard fought game regardless of who is the better team on paper. Steele is a good DC and I'm sure has been studying our offense this summer like a GT freshman studying for his 1st calculus final. It won't matter though. Paraphrasing Bill Curry, "while the other coach is playing checkers, Johnson is playing chess":laugher:

Go Jackets!
 
I wonder how easy it will be for Clemson to go from playing against a team that runs a system like that and who is no pushover, to playing against a system like ours (which will be much more polished since the last time we met) with only 5 days rest?
Click to expand...
Our passing game is basically his system. You prepare for MTSU's passing and GT's passing the same way. The only significant difference is we run triple option with it.

If Clemson is smart, they'll prepare for MTSU's passing game, tell their players MTSU is a warmup for stopping Tech from passing, and then spend the time after the MTSU focusing on Tech's running game.
 
TechSBP said:
I think Clemson would be better with Steele as HC and Dabo employed as a used car salesman.
Click to expand...

I think this may be the inside thinking over there. If Dabo doesn't work out, Steele is on staff. My bet is on him being the next HC at CU in about 3 years. Given what they did under TB, they won't wait that long for Dabo.
 
I dont understand what all the worry is about?!? For those who was at or watched the game this was probably GT defense best game. They destroyed everything Clemson threw at them. The game was only close due to the CB slippin which left Aaron Kelly wide open for the TD. Expect a 2 TD victory by us!
 
idaman54 said:
I dont understand what all the worry is about?!? For those who was at or watched the game this was probably GT defense best game. They destroyed everything Clemson threw at them. The game was only close due to the CB slippin which left Aaron Kelly wide open for the TD. Expect a 2 TD victory by us!
Click to expand...

I expect their QB play to be a little better this year. But I am not worried. At home, thursday night, we roll......
 
yellowandnaked said:
I expect their QB play to be a little better this year. But I am not worried. At home, thursday night, we roll......
Click to expand...

On the year you will likely be right, but not against us. I don't expect a brand new QB to do better than the previous QB (no matter how bad/good either of them are) on their first road game ever, and on a Thurs night no less.
 
GTLiebs said:
On the year you will likely be right, but not against us. I don't expect a brand new QB to do better than the previous QB (no matter how bad/good either of them are) on their first road game ever, and on a Thurs night no less.
Click to expand...

Agreed!
 
GTLiebs said:
On the year you will likely be right, but not against us. I don't expect a brand new QB to do better than the previous QB (no matter how bad/good either of them are) on their first road game ever, and on a Thurs night no less.
Click to expand...

Yeah, road games are tough for a new QB. Look at the difficulties Reggie had from his first (Thursday night no less) road game against BYU compared to the game against Auburn.

Bennet wasn't much better against UVa (I'm skipping the defensive throttling of ND) in his first road start.
 
GTCrew said:
#5. Pressure. Clemson will be underdogs. They will play loose and we could be tight playing as favorites on national TV. They may have "a chip on their shoulder" and may really be focused on this game. Lore says we play better as an underdog.
Click to expand...

We beat them in 2007 as well, so shouldn't they logically have beaten us last year? True, it was close, and I do expect this game to be a competitive one, but I am sure we'll pull it off easily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top