ADVERTISEMENT

ESPN Says ...

SportsSuites1

SportsSuites1

Well-Known Member
Oct 17, 2007
7,125
2,042
113
clemson vs. Louisville

"So far it's an ugly game. Penalties, drops, sacks, interceptions, motion, roughing the passer, Watson's getting looks he hasn't seen before and he hasn't been able to recognize correctly, he's thrown several balls behind his receivers, he just hasn't been able to get his rhythm yet."

"Louisville needs more continuity, playing three different quarterbacks creates problems for any team. Their defense has kept them in the game. Their Freshman wide receiver did make that one long catch but he dropped two passes before that, one a clear touchdown after he beat clemson's best defender badly. Louisville should be winning this game."

Heisman stats? I don't think so.
Top 25? maybe with a little 'm'
Top 10? No way.

Louisville gave up SIXTY-FIVE points their 1st two games ... WHERE is that clemson offense? Louisville ALREADY has three sacks and it's just the first half.

clemson gets the kick to start the 2nd half. They best hope its kicked too deep to return otherwise their return guy is just going to run sideways until they tackle him on the 10.
 
clemsons defense is good again for sure.....their offense not so much and it starts with their line
 
atlanta cock# said:
Yes it is.
Click to expand...
Really? Did you even watch that game last night?

I'm laughing right now.
Against Louisville they were barely adequate. That's like saying Louisville has a great defense.
They're going to get smoked by FSU, and several other teams they play, including us.

I saw a weak secondary that wasn't exploited, too many runs by Louisville up the middle and broken assignments on the Cardinals offensive line that made the taters defense look good.

But hey, you can believe what you want. They should have lost that game last night but we're very very fortunate that Louisville' kicker sucked.
 
jdgrn01 said:
Really? Did you even watch that game last night?

I'm laughing right now.
Against Louisville they were barely adequate. That's like saying Louisville has a great defense.
They're going to get smoked by FSU, and several other teams they play, including us.

I saw a weak secondary that wasn't exploited, too many runs by Louisville up the middle and broken assignments on the Cardinals offensive line that made the taters defense look good.

But hey, you can believe what you want. They should have lost that game last night but we're very very fortunate that Louisville' kicker sucked.
Click to expand...
Yes, I watched. It was their first road game against a coach who owns SOS. Clemp was in total control the whole night, especially along their DL. Given they lost so much from last year, I'm impressed how good they looked. In fact, it ticks me off that we used to look that good less than 2 seasons ago but no more. We gave up a ton against UNC and UK and we lost to freaking UK in our home opener in what should have been a revenge victory. Clemp would not have lost to UK under those circumstances, and they will maul UNC as they usually do. Their D will only get better as the season progresses. That's what talent and good coaching tend to do.

Take your garnet colored glasses off. They are good. They are better than us. It's an astonishing turn of events for which only SOS and Jr. should have to answer for. I wish the chicken-***t press or the callers to SOS's call-in show would make SOS answer for what's going on. Maybe, yesterday's article in The State will finally be the beginning of some real journalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcollie
atlanta cock# said:
Yes, I watched. It was their first road game against a coach who owns SOS. Clemp was in total control the whole night, especially along their DL. Given they lost so much from last year, I'm impressed how good they looked. In fact, it ticks me off that we used to look that good less than 2 seasons ago but no more. We gave up a ton against UNC and UK and we lost to freaking UK in our home opener in what should have been a revenge victory. Clemp would not have lost to UK under those circumstances, and they will maul UNC as they usually do. Their D will only get better as the season progresses. That's what talent and good coaching tend to do.

Take your garnet colored glasses off. They are good. They are better than us. It's an astonishing turn of events for which only SOS and Jr. should have to answer for. I wish the chicken-***t press or the callers to SOS's call-in show would make SOS answer for what's going on. Maybe, yesterday's article in The State will finally be the beginning of some real journalism.
Click to expand...
You have no idea how GREAT they are, even through Orange glasses, you have to admit, they have played NO ONE!! Tar holes beat them by double digits!!
 
atlanta cock# said:
Yes, I watched. It was their first road game against a coach who owns SOS. Clemp was in total control the whole night, especially along their DL. Given they lost so much from last year, I'm impressed how good they looked. In fact, it ticks me off that we used to look that good less than 2 seasons ago but no more. We gave up a ton against UNC and UK and we lost to freaking UK in our home opener in what should have been a revenge victory. Clemp would not have lost to UK under those circumstances, and they will maul UNC as they usually do. Their D will only get better as the season progresses. That's what talent and good coaching tend to do.

Take your garnet colored glasses off. They are good. They are better than us. It's an astonishing turn of events for which only SOS and Jr. should have to answer for. I wish the chicken-***t press or the callers to SOS's call-in show would make SOS answer for what's going on. Maybe, yesterday's article in The State will finally be the beginning of some real journalism.
Click to expand...


Dude.... I think the Taterboard is in your favorites folder.... perhaps you should jump on over there..

Clemson was in total control??? LMAO... they had 20 first downs on the night 4 more than Louisville
They punted the same number of times
They were 5-14 on third downs (stellar right?)
With the exception of what equates to a "trick" play they had to throw screens and rely on the pitch or qb draw to gain any real yards.
As if any of the three tune up teams they've played so far are powerhouses, Louisville (the new Duke) played as well if not better with a lousy rushing plan and supposedly worse quarterback.

You can try and give the Taters all the credit you want but, they're going to be in a bad way the rest of the season..
 
  • Like
Reactions: craneoperatr1_a_aol.com, Tigerof66 and cockofdawn
jdgrn01 said:
Dude.... I think the Taterboard is in your favorites folder.... perhaps you should jump on over there..

Clemson was in total control??? LMAO... they had 20 first downs on the night 4 more than Louisville
They punted the same number of times
They were 5-14 on third downs (stellar right?)
With the exception of what equates to a "trick" play they had to throw screens and rely on the pitch or qb draw to gain any real yards.
As if any of the three tune up teams they've played so far are powerhouses, Louisville (the new Duke) played as well if not better with a lousy rushing plan and supposedly worse quarterback.

You can try and give the Taters all the credit you want but, they're going to be in a bad way the rest of the season..
Click to expand...
I thought we were talking about the D, no?

And, spare me the Tater chit.
 
Last edited:
Louisville is not a good team so how would we know if the tater d was good or not? The auburn team the taters have been laughing at all week beat this louisville team lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigTomE and Tigerof66
atlanta cock# said:
I thought we were talking about the D, no?
Click to expand...
Let's talk about Clemsons sterling D against three "powerhouse" teams...

They suck... If there D was any good Louisville wouldn't have been able to score.
Their efficiency rating was as high as Clemson's offense. They had fewer first down (4 less) but they ran fewer plays.
They won the turnover battle.
They had more passing yards on Offense.
The point is - The taters D sucks and you shouldn't be giving them any credit.
And they were only adequate enough against Louisville.
Had Petrino used the final 4 minutes correctly they could have kicked a tying field goal and then who knows what happens. Such is life, however their Defense (if it was so stellar) never should have allowed Louisville to even be in this game.

You'll see when ND comes to town and set you Taters straight.
 
SportsSuites1 said:
clemson vs. Louisville

"So far it's an ugly game. Penalties, drops, sacks, interceptions, motion, roughing the passer, Watson's getting looks he hasn't seen before and he hasn't been able to recognize correctly, he's thrown several balls behind his receivers, he just hasn't been able to get his rhythm yet."

"Louisville needs more continuity, playing three different quarterbacks creates problems for any team. Their defense has kept them in the game. Their Freshman wide receiver did make that one long catch but he dropped two passes before that, one a clear touchdown after he beat clemson's best defender badly. Louisville should be winning this game."

Heisman stats? I don't think so.
Top 25? maybe with a little 'm'
Top 10? No way.

Louisville gave up SIXTY-FIVE points their 1st two games ... WHERE is that clemson offense? Louisville ALREADY has three sacks and it's just the first half.

clemson gets the kick to start the 2nd half. They best hope its kicked too deep to return otherwise their return guy is just going to run sideways until they tackle him on the 10.
Click to expand...


I am just glad that we survived, need to improve a great deal to be competitive with the Irish.
CPMKpz7UAAAv7cS.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Silver707 and LegalTiger
Clemson's problems are not our problems. Our problems are our own including the things Clemson is getting right, like Clemson continuing to beat us in head to head recruit battles most of the time despite beating them most of the time on the field like a rented mule. That is our concern, not whether Clemson has the coaches to actually utilize the talent we should be getting in an efficient manner. We can't let them dominate SC recruiting year after year without paying a steep toll for it.
 
atlanta cock# said:
Yes, I watched. It was their first road game against a coach who owns SOS. Clemp was in total control the whole night, especially along their DL. Given they lost so much from last year, I'm impressed how good they looked. In fact, it ticks me off that we used to look that good less than 2 seasons ago but no more. We gave up a ton against UNC and UK and we lost to freaking UK in our home opener in what should have been a revenge victory. Clemp would not have lost to UK under those circumstances, and they will maul UNC as they usually do. Their D will only get better as the season progresses. That's what talent and good coaching tend to do.

Take your garnet colored glasses off. They are good. They are better than us. It's an astonishing turn of events for which only SOS and Jr. should have to answer for. I wish the chicken-***t press or the callers to SOS's call-in show would make SOS answer for what's going on. Maybe, yesterday's article in The State will finally be the beginning of some real journalism.
Click to expand...


They don't play UNC dumbass.
 
Clemson's D Line will abuse every team they play this year. Wilkens is a beast freshman providing depth. Not many people even try to throw Mack Alexanders way. Boulware is mad man
 
TimmyBobby said:
Clemson's D Line will abuse every team they play this year. Wilkens is a beast freshman providing depth. Not many people even try to throw Mack Alexanders way. Boulware is mad man
Click to expand...
They're better than the '85 Bears. In fact, I think the '85 Bears would run in fear from them. Fast.
 
atlanta cock# said:
Yes, I watched. It was their first road game against a coach who owns SOS. Clemp was in total control the whole night, especially along their DL. Given they lost so much from last year, I'm impressed how good they looked. In fact, it ticks me off that we used to look that good less than 2 seasons ago but no more. We gave up a ton against UNC and UK and we lost to freaking UK in our home opener in what should have been a revenge victory. Clemp would not have lost to UK under those circumstances, and they will maul UNC as they usually .......
Click to expand...
 
?Atlanta Cock# ?

Whoever you are, I totally disagree that Clemson will maul North Carolina.
2015,Clemson may well win, but if you cannot see that Gene Chizik is vastly improving that NC defense from LAST year, then you either are not trying to see that or there's something wrong upstairs my friend.
Go 'COCKS !
 
jdgrn01 said:
Let's talk about Clemsons sterling D against three "powerhouse" teams...

They suck... If there D was any good Louisville wouldn't have been able to score.
Their efficiency rating was as high as Clemson's offense. They had fewer first down (4 less) but they ran fewer plays.
They won the turnover battle.
They had more passing yards on Offense.
The point is - The taters D sucks and you shouldn't be giving them any credit.
And they were only adequate enough against Louisville.
Had Petrino used the final 4 minutes correctly they could have kicked a tying field goal and then who knows what happens. Such is life, however their Defense (if it was so stellar) never should have allowed Louisville to even be in this game.

You'll see when ND comes to town and set you Taters straight.
Click to expand...

You left out the part that Louisville was 2-14 on 3rd downs and was held to 140 less yards of total offense then what they had against Auburn (405) and Houston (397). Clemson holding them to 270 total yards and 10 points is impressive no matter if you want to believe it or not. I wish we still had that kind of defense that could loss starters like that and still come out looking very good the next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcollie and Tigerpaw00
phs1721 said:
You left out the part that Louisville was 2-14 on 3rd downs and was held to 140 less yards of total offense then what they had against Auburn (405) and Houston (397). Clemson holding them to 270 total yards and 10 points is impressive no matter if you want to believe it or not. I wish we still had that kind of defense that could loss starters like that and still come out looking very good the next year.
Click to expand...

This and the fact they only allowed like 40 rushing yards all night, they play man-man coverage so the DB's are going to get beat sometimes. They bank on their D-line to get pressure on the QB to throw the ball fast, and not let the WR's run deep down field. You can play man-man when you have really good DB's, and a 6'5 beast of a safety back there also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tigerpaw00
One more little tidbit: don't give me this line about Watson's high percentage rating on passing. He throws five yard passes in the flat 90% of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigTomE
Clemson was very fortunate to have their DL coach fall into their laps. Brooks was Chavis' long-time DL coach at Tennessee.
 
Special teams, in general are average to poor for clemson. KO returns are poor - their guy returned two and ran sideways twice 'till somebody tackled him on the 10. They cover punts and KO's poorly ... not just the TD runback, EVERY kick, in general.
clemson's punter takes too long to let it hit his foot - he WILL have kick(s) blocked this year ... part of the reason being he drifts to his right away from his blockers before dropping the ball.
Alexander got BEAT flat-out twice DEEP, one was dropped (certain TD) another overthrown by 10 yards.
Boulware made SEVERAL tackles 'early' coming in completely UNTOUCHED ... he didn't make two tackles after the middle of the 3rd Q once they assigned a blocker to him.
Big hype Hyatt got beat AT LEAST five times resulting in sacks or TFL.
clemson is in REAL TROUBLE at center, that 3rd string guy cannot call blocking assignments anywhere near as good as Norton.
clemson has an all-acc runner in their RB, he's the real deal. Good tackling would have cut 75 yards off his totals.
Watson was either 'off' or is WAY 'over-hyped' 'cause he REPEATEDLY threw short-arm, behind receivers, overthrows, and bouncers. His BEST skill is the 'delay-draw' ... it ain't 'throwing it'.
Get pressure on Watson to stop 'deep' routes from developing and he's average to good but not GREAT - he throws the 'screen' too much, he will give up a couple of pick-6's on that this year once he starts facing real CB's.
clemson has some good young WR's and a good, hard-running RB ... 1-10 on offense they're a solid 7 ... on defense they're a 6-7.
clemson's gonna have 3 losses when they get to Columbia ... we can and will beat them again this year.
ND is completely beat-up and will be playing their 3rd-streing QB but he's good enough if they don't fumble, clemson will lose to ND and GA will pound 'em. They'll lose another one somewhere after suffering those two losses, before losing to SC to finish 8-4 regular season.
FSU ain't the FSU of old but they're better than clemson ... the ACC is pretty weak this year but clemson is a 'year early' to take advantage of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: colaheat
atlanta cock# said:
Yes, I watched. It was their first road game against a coach who owns SOS. Clemp was in total control the whole night, especially along their DL. Given they lost so much from last year, I'm impressed how good they looked. In fact, it ticks me off that we used to look that good less than 2 seasons ago but no more. We gave up a ton against UNC and UK and we lost to freaking UK in our home opener in what should have been a revenge victory. Clemp would not have lost to UK under those circumstances, and they will maul UNC as they usually do. Their D will only get better as the season progresses. That's what talent and good coaching tend to do.

Take your garnet colored glasses off. They are good. They are better than us. It's an astonishing turn of events for which only SOS and Jr. should have to answer for. I wish the chicken-***t press or the callers to SOS's call-in show would make SOS answer for what's going on. Maybe, yesterday's article in The State will finally be the beginning of some real journalism.
Click to expand...

Gee, this is a strange post coming from Atlantacock. Or not?
 
TimmyBobby said:
Clemson's D Line will abuse every team they play this year. Wilkens is a beast freshman providing depth. Not many people even try to throw Mack Alexanders way. Boulware is mad man
Click to expand...

Well, damn! If the Taters would just play a football team with a pulse, we'd all be better informed of their magnificence.
 
rogue cock said:
Clemson was very fortunate to have their DL coach fall into their laps. Brooks was Chavis' long-time DL coach at Tennessee.
Click to expand...

Fall into our laps? For the first two years he was at Clemson every Gamecock and Sooner laughed and said that he was a terrible coach and was out the door at Oklahoma etc. Dabo saw something in him when no one else did. That is hardly falling into someone's lap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Greg Smith

Four-star QB Ryan Montgomery sets next round of visits

Replies
3
Views
186
The Insiders Forum
Caleb Alexander
Caleb Alexander
L

2025 Blythewood DT Sterling Sanders drawing interest talks Gamecocks

Replies
0
Views
325
The Insiders Forum
Lee Wardlaw
L
D

Miss State Game- Good, Bad,and ugly

Replies
8
Views
587
Gamecocks Forum
detective29
D
Alan Cole

South Carolina Men's Basketball Open Locker Room Report (Post-Auburn)

Replies
0
Views
501
The Insiders Forum
Alan Cole
Alan Cole
Alan Cole

South Carolina Women's Basketball Open Locker Room Quotes (Post-Indiana)

Replies
0
Views
583
The Insiders Forum
Alan Cole
Alan Cole
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back