What are the keys to the Clemson game?

kirbee

kirbee

Jolly Good Fellow
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
1,977
Here are some random thoughts on our team and the Clemson game. I would like to read yours.

1. Can our secondary defend? Can't say if we know this yet.

2. Can our front 4 get any pressure on the QB? Not a lot so far, but we haven't had to blitz much.

3. Are we going to be out of shape? I don't think so because endurance training is only accomplished over a long period of time (not 1 or 2 weeks). This seems to be a concern of others and they may be right.

4. Is Hollings really THAT fast or is Vandy/UConn really that SLOW?

5. Will we ever run to the right? Do we even have to?

6. How do you stop Clemson's height advantage at WR? (There is a #6 here, right?)
smile.gif


7. Are we REALLY going to see an expanded playbook on Saturday? I don't think so.

8. AJ needs to stay smooth and poised. Don't make mistakes and we'll be fine. He has some experience in hostile environments, good thing. Have to protect AJ by the way. Clemson's defense is supposed to be improved big time.

9. Rhino is an X-factor. They guy needs to make 3 plays on either kick coverage, punt return or defense.

10. And the most important: score more points.
 
On #4- I saw both games and there is no doubt Hollings is fast. He runs like a Wide Reciever in the open field. Of course Clemson has the team speed to make a difference between 40 yard TDs and just 20 yard pops. Tony is much faster than any GT back I have seen in a while.

On #7- Good question. I would have said we would run option for sure but Clemson from what I have heard and read did not have trouble with La Tech's attack. So I agree with you, IMHO, the Offense will start out vanilla until Clemson shuts us down and we are forced to open it up.

Finally, turnovers will be key if Clemson's D is as good as advertised. Everybody knows they have speed and perhaps they have the schemes in place to take advantage of it.

I do think Tech will win because I think we have more talent than them. Hollings is a lot better than Georgia's running backs and our O'Line is in the same ballpark as UGA's. Clemson has some key injuries that will take them down a notch.
 
For us to win, I think we need to be able to get pressure on Simmons. If we do, I don't think he can beat us with his running. I've seen nothing that makes me think he's all that good.

Clemson's D really shut UGA down. I'm not sure if they're that good or if UGA is that bad. Every time Greene went back to pass, the pocket just collapsed on him like a sandwich. I'd like to think that we can pass-protect better than that. I also think we have better weapons at running back.

This should be a great test and a great game. The atmosphere in DV is always good when Tech comes to town.
 
I think we squandered a real opportunity in the first two games to prepare for a tough away game like this.
I am not saying that we should have showed them our entire playbook....but we should have run some of the type of plays that we will need to beat klimpsum.
We ran little or no option or option looks.
We didn't hand off a single time to Dixon...what is up with that?
I don't recall throwing to the tight ends.
We got little pass rush and were beaten deep several times but luckily the balls were dropped.
Suggs threw very few passes over a two game stretch.
The second and third units were hampered by poor play selection...obviously coming from Buck.
The second and third defensive units didn't look all that good....I don't see much of anything to rate Tenuta as any improvement over Roof.
Overall, even though we won two easy games, I think an opportunity to more thoroughly prepare for klimpsum was squandered.
Regardless, I think we should beat klimpsum with Buck here or in spite of Buck being here. I just wish he would honor what he said and quit meddling in the offense.
 
#'s 1&2 Good questions that remain to be answered
3& 4 We are in good shape and Hollings is FAST
5 We will use the right side as they up their pressure on the left side. I would love to see a bootleg to the right.
6 There is no...
wink.gif
seriously, refer to your #1
7 I think we will have to open our offense up some and I think we will
8 The whole offense must eliminate the penalties--epsecially the dead ball fouls (procedure, delay.) These didn't hurt so much against vandy and uconn but they will against clem.
9 Not sure what you mean
10 I don't disagree

**the opinions expressed herein become null and void should they be proven wrong. They are worth absolutely nothing
grin.gif
 
Originally posted by beeware:
I just wish he would honor what he said and quit meddling in the offense.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Were not people saying the same thing about O'Leary last year?

Seriously, when are people going to start giving O'Brien the credit for his offense, like it or not?

Please don't say the Seatle Bowl. It was kind of different for only 1 half. This was because we had different personel (no Burns), Hall needed experience, and we had nothing to lose.
 
Originally posted by spellingbee:
7 I think we will have to open our offense up some and I think we will
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">How do you think we will open it up? Option? Bilbo as 'slash'? Use the TE and backs as receivers? Aggressive downfield passing?

I think we'll see off tackle running attack out of a single back mixed with play action passing. ie, the same stuff O'Brien has used from day one.

9 Not sure what you mean
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I see Kelly Rhino as a spark plug for our team. I don't think many people take him seriously (opponents and some of our own fans). This guy is a serious player and continues to make big plays that contribute to wins. I think he is a key player to our team and needs to make 3 big plays in the game for us to win. That could be a tackle on KO coverage, a momentum and field position changing PR, another sack, INT, or 3rd down pass break up or stop.
 
Originally posted by beeware:
I think we squandered a real opportunity in the first two games to prepare for a tough away game like this.
I am not saying that we should have showed them our entire playbook....but we should have run some of the type of plays that we will need to beat klimpsum.
We ran little or no option or option looks.
We didn't hand off a single time to Dixon...what is up with that?
I don't recall throwing to the tight ends.
We got little pass rush and were beaten deep several times but luckily the balls were dropped.
Suggs threw very few passes over a two game stretch.
The second and third units were hampered by poor play selection...obviously coming from Buck.
The second and third defensive units didn't look all that good....I don't see much of anything to rate Tenuta as any improvement over Roof.
Overall, even though we won two easy games, I think an opportunity to more thoroughly prepare for klimpsum was squandered.
Regardless, I think we should beat klimpsum with Buck here or in spite of Buck being here. I just wish he would honor what he said and quit meddling in the offense.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Beeware, I am going to call you out on this one... how do you know WHO was calling the plays? What proof do you have that it wasnt BOB calling the plays, and what proof do you have that Gailey was meddling? Share your proof with us, and if there is no proof... then please dont ASSume that Gailey is not honoring his words... show me the proof, and I will send my apologies to you... otherwise, please do as you ask Ahso to do.. warn us to put on our boots first....

I dont disagree with anything else you have here... its all true,..with the exception of squandering an opportunity, I dont think we have squandered anything .... but I will say this... overall I think we have looked pretty good thus far...

I could imagine if some of the starters had remained in any of these games, and gotten injured, the rub then would have been that Gailey shouldnt have had them out there since the game was won...

I like where we are right now... I will take our chances... and by the way... every good thing that is happening this year, is because these kids and this staff have worked to achieve it... the past regime has NOTHING to do with this success...

Did Gailey steal your girlfriend or something in grade school?
 
Let me throw some water on the fire for a second. A couple of things to be cautious about:

1/WILL Tony Hollings be able to hit the corners against the speed of Clemson like he did the past two weeks??

2/WILL A.J. Suggs be able to keep his poise and play smart against a very improved defense which evidently does its share of stunting and manuevering. A.J. seems to take a bit too long analyzing and instructing before each play. With all this stunting that Clemson does, how will he fare? In the face of a huge hostile crowd no less?

I'm not even gonna mention our virtually untested secondary yet.

I still BEE-lieve we can win, but we're gonna have to play smart, sound football and execute like crazy to win this one. The Tigers are gonna be FIRED up for their home opener. We gotta play GT football!!

Let's avenge last year's debacle and KICK SOME TIGER TAIL!!!
bash.gif
 
Another question I have about Hollings is can he be physical enough to break some tackles downfield from the better, faster defensive backs. I have a feeling the answer is yes - some of these DBs/Ss on better teams might catch him but he'll break lose or at least drag them for extra yds.

I have no doubt in my mind that the tight ends will be invloved beginning this weekend. They're best utilized in possession type situations and we haven't been faced with those situations yet.

I am very concerned about our secondary - this will be the tallest, most physical GROUP of receivers we'll see this year (I say group because McMullen or Fred Gibson may be the best single receiver). I think our safeties will need to punish them for catching it (CoCo has his job cut out for him this weekend) and obviously, don't let the receivers get behind the secondary.

All in all, I feel GT has the more talented team but Clemson hung with UGA (another more talented team) in Athens. So I'll go ahead and throw my biased opinion out there and say GT wins a close one. I believe our special teams play gives us the advantage in this game.
 
The unfortunate thing is that we haven't been tested yet. Neither the players or coaches have been forced to be at their best. That will all change on Saturday.

I think we have what it takes to get the job done, but we'd better be ready to strap it on.
 
First of all, where is everyone getting the idea that Clemson's defense is that much better this year then last ... didn't they give up 31 points to Ugag? Also, Ugag's offense wasn't exactly setting the world on fire in that game (I did not see much of a running game) and they still gave up 31 points!!

Didn't Clemson score 14 points because of turnovers by UGAG deep in UGAG'S own territory? Did Clemson ever mount long, time consuming drives - no. Clemson had 6 fumbles in the game and were able to get all of them back .... that sounds like they're runningbacks have a problem holding on to the ball ... they lucked out a little here, could have been a lot worse and we need to take advantage of this if we can.

I believe we have more weapons on offense and our defense is better then last year. I also believe the Clemson/Ugag was not a barometer for Clemson, Ugag is overrated! Tech is the better team and believe this game is a 7-10 pt victory for the Jackets.
 
KB, I've liked your thoughts and you are dead-on again.
I love the comment on vanilla game plans.It will be interesting to see if we really do see a change in play calling.The old adage about "trying to remember to drain the swamp when you are up to your A in alligators" comes to mind.I didn't see many third and 3 in those first 2 games, much less third and thirteen.That is where the rubber meets the road.
On the same note I wonder if our vanilla Def will change.The D has been dominant but not much competition.( I love the energy Rhino puts in the D also)
 
My three cents worth:

I think the team has been coached well in the first two games, and I think the mass substitutions were warranted, even though the scrubbs and water boy were left in on Connecticut's scoring drives. The scores hurt nothing except the spread to some pickers.

I think we have played vanilla and have practiced a lot more plays than we have used in the games. I would not be surprised to see more use of Dixon and the tight ends this Saturday. You will probably see Fred more involved in the play selection. More plays will run to the right. No reason to hold anything back against Clemson.

If we take care of the ball and have no critical turnovers, we win. Simmons is still a rookie at QB and his confidence has not been solidified. A few early sacks could go a long way toward hurting his confidence and efficiency.

Even though Suggs is a rookie with Tech, he has played in some big games at Tennessee, so he should be a little more settled. If we were to get up by 21, I think it is a no-brainer to put Bilbo in as a change of pace to Clemson,s defense.

The only time I would be careful is free substitution on defense, if we get an early large lead. I would not go beyond the second line of defense unless we were way ahead, and the game was in the fourth quarter.

I think Hollings and Ford will do fine against Clemson, however, I hold my breath due to the injury situation. If we were to get a good lead, it would please me to see both Ford, Hollings, and Dixon sitting on the sideline with Hatch, Clinkscales, and others getting some playing time.

wink.gif
wink.gif
wink.gif
 
Kirbee,
What I think is we will not see "slash Bilbo" yet. Not that that is something that BOB and CG are keeping hidden in the playbook for later, I just don't think it is in the gameplan. I think there will be some TE sets and some drop back passing, and, as you mentioned, passes to the RB.

I don't look to see the option used much more than it has been. In other words, the offense will open up, but not depart from what we have seen as the basic gameplan. The opening up will loosen clem's D so that they can't key on one thing (i.e. the left side, stacking the box, not keying on the RB coming out of the backfield without the ball.)

I understand now about KR. He needs to be a momentum changer--he is a major spark-plug.
 
Originally posted by MsTechAnalysis:
First of all, where is everyone getting the idea that Clemson's defense is that much better this year then last ... didn't they give up 31 points to Ugag? Also, Ugag's offense wasn't exactly setting the world on fire in that game (I did not see much of a running game) and they still gave up 31 points!!

Didn't Clemson score 14 points because of turnovers by UGAG deep in UGAG'S own territory? Did Clemson ever mount long, time consuming drives - no. Clemson had 6 fumbles in the game and were able to get all of them back .... that sounds like they're runningbacks have a problem holding on to the ball ... they lucked out a little here, could have been a lot worse and we need to take advantage of this if we can.

I believe we have more weapons on offense and our defense is better then last year. I also believe the Clemson/Ugag was not a barometer for Clemson, Ugag is overrated! Tech is the better team and believe this game is a 7-10 pt victory for the Jackets.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">No offense, but I doubt you watched that Clemson/UGA game. If you had, I don't think you would have just posted this stuff.

Clemson had a drive of 64 yards and 78 yards, both resulting in TD's. So, they did mount long drives, in contrast to your assertion. Outside of that, they didn't do a whole lot on offense. They were out of synch much of the game.

As for Clemson's defense. They gave up 1 TD drive of roughly 30 yards, a 15 yard drive and an 80 yard drive. The 80 yard drive was aided by 2 unsportsmanlike calls against Clemson, both times on decisive 3rd down stops. Also, they gave up a touchdown on a kickoff return. Finally, UGA's field goal drive was about 19 yards.

Georgia feasted off of Clemson special teams mistakes and field position.

Outside of that, Clemson's D dominated UGA. They only gave up 203 yards. I don't care how good or bad UGA's offense is. If you only give up 203 yards to them, you've played a damn good game.

They'll be tough. They are beatable, but they'll be tough.
 
Georgia outscored CL 10-0 in the fourth quarter. Bottom line especially in openers is to close the deal whether pretty or not which is what UGA did. Defense is always ahead of offense to start a season. 31 points is usually enough to beat an ACC team.
grin.gif
Tech had better be ready Sat for a lot more speed and athleticism than you faced in the first two games.
 
Originally posted by MeLuvUgaLongTime:
Georgia outscored CL 10-0 in the fourth quarter. Bottom line especially in openers is to close the deal whether pretty or not which is what UGA did. Defense is always ahead of offense to start a season. 31 points is usually enough to beat an ACC team.
grin.gif
Tech had better be ready Sat for a lot more speed and athleticism than you faced in the first two games.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">You are right about the Clemson speed and athleticism... it will be stepped up a few notches this weekend for sure... but I am not so sure that I would credit UGA too much in that defeat of Clemson... if Clemson had a field goal kicker, you guys would have lost that game... I saw Clemson beat themselves... but, a win is a win..
 
Some great thoughts guys and gals. Its gonna be another nail biter I'm afraid.

The dawg is right that we're stepping up the competition (duh).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top