Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Watch Out For Cowboys UDFA Tim Benford

Postgame Impressions: Tiger D swats the Bumblebees

Clemson's defense came ready to play today. Everyone needs to give credit to Steele for having them prepared and executing their assignments about as well as you can against the triple option.

The scheme we executed today was essentially a blend of two schemes we used last season. Ends were in 2-point stance and were on Dive to QB all day that I saw, and there did not seem to be any change in assignment there. OLB on the pitch back with secondary support, frequently with DeAndre coming down in the alley to present an 8 man front. Corico Hawkins had Dive to QB duties though the End play was so good that he rarely had to be there to stop the play. We aligned the linebackers in the same staggered alignment we used in the ACCCG, but brought them a little closer to the line of scrimmage. Corico wasn't standing as far away as Maye was in the same MLB spot last year. On the front we used the same 1 and 3 technique alignment that we normally run, though I did not quite see how we determined the strength (I believe Field/Boundary). In addition, we played many EVEN fronts with 2i-2i alignments that prevented the midline from working (though they did not appear to call it much at all).

Clemson also played DTs at the End positions several times, and moved Branch to linebacker to make things difficult for Tech's blockers to his side. In the secondary we played 4-across and there was a little Cover 2 thrown in for good measure, which was no different than the ACCCG. This was what we predicted beforehand.

In our articles earlier this week I gave two primary objectives to execute to stop triple option teams, stop the FB Dive and Hammer the QB. Clemson did both today. The only times Tech got significant yards on the Dive were when we were in EVEN fronts and the Center had a clear path to Hawkins and either blocked him or forced Hawkins to go the wrong way and take himself out of the play. When the Dive went to the B-gap, the End was always there waiting for him, and many times the End would wrap the FB up and then break free to also tackle Nesbitt, who was hit all afternoon. In the 2nd half they began to have success by cut-blocking the Ends.

We were also helped by a series of questionable pass calls early on from Johnson. I was scratching my head in the 1st and 2nd quarters when Tech tried to throw the ball. They didn't need to. Nesbitt is an awful thrower and we should've picked off 4 passes today. Once they figured out to go underneath against our weak LB coverage they had success however, and this won't go unnoticed by our future opponents.

While no one really stood out up front by having their name called on every play (and I'm certain Tech intentionally ran away from Bowers), the DL should get a majority of the credit. The DEs always executed their block-down step down and were always standing in the B-gap waiting for the play. The Tackles did an outstanding job clogging up holes to stop the Dive and spill it to the DE. The DE used their eyes and watched Nesbitt keep it or pitch it. We weren't awesome (4.9 ypc allowed), but good enough to prevent scores and we stifled Nesbitt (15 car, 2 yds).

Unfortunately I can't say the same thing for the playcalling.

Clemson had immediate success against a terrible defensive front, and did not take advantage of it with the calls. On the very first drive we came out passing from the shotgun. The first 3 plays were all throws. That tells me that our offensive staff barely watched the film of GT thus far. In the first half we threw 19 times and rushed 16, averaging 10 yards a clip. When you can get 4-5 yards per touch, you don't need to throw the ball more than run it, that doesnt make any sense. Why would you only give Andre Ellington 8 carries in the 1st half when he is gutting the defense on every other play? (124 yds in 1st half alone) Hell even The Skirt gained yards, so you know Tech sucks up front. Parker was 11 of 19 for about 100 yards in the 1st half, which itself is not bad, but he did not need to throw the ball that often.

To compound it, even with a lead in the 3rd quarter we kept throwing the football. On the first drive what happened? We came out passing. We got 4 yards on the first touch by AE, then threw 5 straight passes. Why? We were lucky they were caught this week, but I don't see the logic in putting the ball in the air when you are killing them on the ground, not when you've had serious issues with drops in every game thus far.

Kyle had 27 attempts for the day, which wasn't necessary. If he worked on hitting guys in stride we'd have at least 1 more TD for the day. Instead he still throws behind receivers and does not appear to be looking at Allen, who was wide open multiple times today.

I'm thankful that Nuke Hopkins puts forth the correct amount of effort that we don't get from WRs who started the season with more PT. He is aggressive when it comes to getting the football. Every week he impresses me with his ball skills and tenacity in blocks.

Andre Ellington had only 20 carries for the entire day, with just 2 in the 3rd quarter. Everything else came on the last drive. They tell us he's going to get the ball more, and he did get it more than Harper (11c 56 yds), but when your RB gets over 10 a clip in the 1st half why don't you run the hell out of it in the 3rd quarter and put the game away? There is no excuse for Andre having less than 25 carries in any game.

Sometimes I swear they throw it simply because they want to be a passing team, and don't recognize their strengths.

But the last drive was a thing of beauty. When they decided to run the clock off, they bled it dry. 15 plays, 14 rushes, 64 yards, and 7:36 off the clock = instant erection.

Comment 24 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Hell Yeah !!!

Our defense was stellar today . I will have to tip my hat to Steele for his gameplan today , and the players preperation .
The offense however confuses me . The running between the tackles , the long drive in the fourth quarter , Ellington…. Sweet !!! …….but , why not do that the whole game and put our opponents away . If we had done this all year we would have won against Auburn , Miami , and would have smoked UNC , yet we didn’t – and here we are barely hanging on……again.
Congrats to the team today tho , well done and lets go to Boston and smack them around .
Oh yeah , Bowers and company rocked , well played again defense . ;-)

by tyeargin on Oct 23, 2010 10:42 PM EDT reply actions  

Props to Steele for having the right game plan in place. The D did look nasty, but I think Steele should send Paul Johnson a fruit basket for trying to throw the ball way too much. I think had PJ had a better gameplan, this game easily could’ve gone the other way. As for the offense, I couldn’t agree more with your assesment. Way the hell too many throws when the OL was opening up huge holes to run through. Dabo and Napier will cost this team at least 2 or 3 more losses with stupid play calling and using the wrong personnel. Happy for the win but I still think our coaching staff is one of the dumbest bunches ever.

by veryveryproud on Oct 24, 2010 4:28 AM EDT reply actions  

I disagree somewhat

I think you can’t discount how much the passing we were doing was opening things up for our running game. Additionally, if you don’t work on the passing attack against tough opponents, it doesn’t improve… and someday when they are stacking the box and we can’t run we won’t be able to pass either.

Now, I agree that we should not have had more pass attempts than rushing attempts. I think we were just trying to exploit what their scheme was giving us.

Unlike most of the ShakintheSouthland crowd, I don’t think we have a bunch of stupid coaches. I do think we have some pretty good ones that unfortunately are learning as they go… hopefully they develop into a top notch staff.

by Orange-Addict on Oct 24, 2010 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

Nothing we were doing with the pass was opening those holes

it was them having a garbage NG who could be blocked with just the Center and which allows our Guards to proceed directly to the 2nd level that opened up holes.

by DrB on Oct 24, 2010 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

So let me get this straight

You think that throwing set up the run ?? I’d like to hear how you support that argument.

We started the game in an empty set. We went shotgun with 3-4 wides.. i dont know.. 15-20 times. 95% of the time.. we throw out of those sets

At the end of the game.. we line up and pound the ball down their throats.. at which point the entire stadium knew we were running the ball.

And.. you think being in the shotgun for half the game allowed AE to break runs of 55 and 44 yards.. and allowed us to sustain a drive of 7 minutes at the end of the game????

And.. you think being in the shotgun for half the game allowed AE to break runs of 55 and 44 yards.. and allowed us to sustain a drive of 7 minutes at the end of the game????

by sedge94 on Oct 24, 2010 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I AGREE ,

The only time I felt that we were a “powerhouse” looking team was during the 4th period.
When our Tigers ran the ball down GT’s throat in the fourth quarter , we looked like 1981 for a brief moment . We actually had a “Danny” moment for a few minutes.
We , however DO have the dumbest coaching staff in college football .
We , get lucky………..

by tyeargin on Oct 24, 2010 6:11 AM EDT reply actions  

The defensive front...

In your article, you say that up front we played our usual scheme for the most part.

It sure looked like to me that we came initially (and for much of the game) with a noseguard and two tackles— looked like a 3-4 scheme to me. Is that not correct??

by Orange-Addict on Oct 24, 2010 9:40 AM EDT reply actions  

Defense played decent

I think the defense did a decent job. Still gave up abotu 350 yards. Thats not a good defensive performance. I think we won that game simply because Tech isnt as good as they were last year. They severly miss D.Thomas and Dwyer. But I’m happy right now, a win is a win.

by IhateUSuC on Oct 24, 2010 11:13 AM EDT reply actions  

If possible, offensive play

calling was worse for this game than NC, Miami and Maryland. I agree that it looked like coaches had not watched film. Still don’t understand what Billy is trying to establish at any point in the game. Receivers caught the ball much better but KP still looks like he can’t seethe field. Had receivers open all day. Obvious that Clemson had much better talent and depth (of course had that last 2 years as well). Defense played hard and were well coached. AU had 400 plus yds vs LSU. Clemson could have had 400 yds vs GT. We won, but offensive play calling was still bad in my opinion. (if we just run the ball, would not have needed to attempt and miss FG)

by zilforreal on Oct 24, 2010 11:36 AM EDT reply actions  

The offense generated 403 yards to be exact and the NC game was their worst.

81st ranked run defense and we try to throw it like a Mike Leach type offense.

by TigerEast on Oct 24, 2010 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

The difference

I think poor play calling, personnel decisions, and game planning cost us around 10 pts. each game. This season it has cost us losses against auburn and unc. I don’t think Miami would have been any different with an injured Parker, but maybe so.

by THE Tobias Funke on Oct 24, 2010 2:40 PM EDT reply actions  

I think PJ knew that he was outmanned, hence the passing plays, trick plays etc.

And in PJ’s defense (or perhaps more appropriately, in Nesbitt’s defense) the GT receivers did drop some balls including a TD pass. PJ really pulled out all the stops with a fake punt from about his own 20, a WR (or A-back?) pass to Nesbitt, etc. I think he knew early on (and probably before the game) that he couldn’t pound the ball against Clemson like he did last year, and that it was going to take some big trick plays or passing plays to win.

by RazzMcTazz on Oct 24, 2010 7:29 PM EDT reply actions  

I think passing establishes that the team will in fact attempt to pass

We may actually complete them, so the defense cannot sell out completely every single play to stop us from running.

Everyone assumes for some reason that we can just run at will out of the I formation every single play and it will always work.

We were 63% passing, 1 TD, no INT, no sacks allowed. 236 rushing yards. No fumbles. Held Nesbitt, who was getting 92 yards per game, to 2 yards.

Unbelievable how much complaining goes on after a victory.

by Cristo on Oct 25, 2010 7:39 AM EDT reply actions  

Did you see one indication that Tech could stop the run? No you didnt.

3 possessions went scoreless the other day. 21 yards total gained on those drives. Andre touched the ball only 1 time on those 3 possessions.

You yourself complain that they don’t give it to Andre enough, and he had only 8 carries in the 1st half and only 20 overall. Andre shouldn’t see a game with less than 25.

If you can’t see they played against their strengths once again, you’re not paying attention to the game.

by DrB on Oct 25, 2010 8:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

I do agree that Ellington should get the majority of carries

And he did so. Almost twice as much work as Harper.
But, we ran 65 plays, and I don’t think every one of those can be a carry for Ellington. We rushed 38 of the 65 plays. So that means sometimes, somebody else on the team must get the ball. Either Parker or Harper rushing, or a pass to a receiver.

I think the team needs to pass because the passing offense clearly needs work. They need to execute it in game situations. If future opponents know we are completely unable to pass effectively, they are more likely to defend heavily against the run, and force us to pass, like happened a few years ago when everyone was stacking up against Davis and Spiller and we could not (or would not) throw the ball downfield. Then we are in a situation like Georgia Tech was – a running team who is forced to pass and can’t.

I think we could have run it a bit more, but I do not think we can run it every single play.

by Cristo on Oct 25, 2010 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions  

You folks seem to think I'm advocating 65 rushes per game. I am not.

I am saying you run your horses to victory and play to your strengths.

We rushed 38 times out of 65 plays only because they finally decided to just pound it in the 4th quarter. Take out the last drive in the last two games and look at where they want to go with this offense. Its almost 60/40 pass/run. The majority of that passing is now shotgun, a complete change from where we were before, and the shotgun takes away your best running plays. Parker is not lethal on zone read, and the zone runs from the normal gun have rarely worked consistently since the days of Rodriguez.

So if I’m one of our opponents, I play Cover 3 when we go Shotgun. I stack the box in any under-center formation. I’d beat Clemson unless they just outcatted me.

I have not once said that you cannot work on the passing game while playing to your strengths. I don’t want a repeat of 2006 either. I myself would’ve passed about 15-17 times just to work on it, even though we really did not need to throw more than 10 times. On 3rd & medium/long, I’d pass it of course, as its the better percentage play.

But if you give me a 17-3 halftime lead, I’m going to run the ball in the 3rd quarter until they prove to me they can stop it.

by DrB on Oct 25, 2010 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions  

I'll agree with all that then

And it seems that we are not doing much passing out of non-shotgun formations, so like you say, it looks like the run/pass call is largely predictable by whether or not Parker is under center.

I’d have to look at every play so far to see if that is really true, but that is the feeling I get from the games.

by Cristo on Oct 25, 2010 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Listen to the man... he's a DR

When you have AE and he’s actually in the game, he’s a threat to take it to the house on every play. You know that.. and every DC in the league knows that. Teams are going to have to scheme to take that away. When you have that threat lined up behind KP, it makes passing a whole helluva lot easier when LBs are keying on the run every play. Lining up in 4 wide with the skirt in the backfield does not force a defense to have to commit to the run. Throwing should be what we do as a defense tries to take away AE. Throwing should NOT be the thing that we are “trying to get better at” at the expense of running AE

Ever watch a pittsburg steelers game ? That is a team with an identity. 75% of the time when they throw… is off playaction. Big Ben has made a living throwing to wide open receivers because every defense is forced to try to take away the run. There were a few years where they wanted to experiment and be a “throwing team” Those teams weren’t in the playoffs in January.

by sedge94 on Oct 25, 2010 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree

If you are running it at will, you dont stop running…EVER! Napier outsmarts himself sometimes. I’m sure he was thinking that “we’re running it so easily, they’ll stack 9 in the box this play, so I better throw…” As well as we were running it, you can still run on third and long, still have an excellent chance at picking up first down.

When you drop back to pass you can have 4 possible outcomes (sack, incompletion, interception, or a reception), only one is good.

by IhateUSuC on Oct 25, 2010 8:49 AM EDT reply actions  

Tech's Defense Was Terrible

This was especially the case up front.

The nose guard could easily be blocked with only the C allowing the OG to get to the second level and take out their backers opening up huge holes.

Tech also still looks uncomfortable in the 3-4. They line up wrong. They hit the wrong holes. Ellington’s second TD run was a perfect example. 2 backers and a safety went into one hole on the left prior to the snap. Ellington just runs right and their are like 4 guys to block 3 defender and when Ellington gets to the second level there is only one saftely that has to come from the other side to try an make the play.

JV defending. Just terrible.

Not trying to take anything away from our guys but I think we could have won passing the ball less than 10 times likely less than 5 times.

by PistolFormation on Oct 25, 2010 9:47 AM EDT reply actions  

The coaches talked a lot about breaking tendencies from self-scouting. It did make me uncomfortable to see us throw so much, but maybe they knew what they were doing. Paul Johnson is a solid coach and he was throwing. Maybe he was trying to break some tendencies as well.

by White-Tiger on Oct 25, 2010 3:07 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation site about the Clemson Tigers. If you want to take a hard look at both sides of something, feel free to stick around and comment. Be forewarned, we don't pump sunshine here.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Img2_small
Clemson Expansion: Big Picture
Small
2012 RULE CHANGES = THE WUSSIFICATION OF FOOTBALL
Clem_brawl-736603_small
Bellamy
Clem_brawl-736603_small
The state of Clemson Football (long)
Small
First hand (sort of) experience with Batson's system
Small
Somebody gets it
Small
Clemson Basketball Recruiting Chart
Angels_small
Brownell & Kansas State
Collegecampus_small
Frank Martin to coach USC Basketball
Small
Veteran Hopes to Fulfill Promise at Clemson.

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Bengal Tiger

Danny_ford_small DrB

Slick_small FIGUREFOUR

Persian Tiger

Tyree_helmet_catch_small ggggmen08

Small QuackingTiger

Sumatran Tiger

Sma_20clemson-tiger-w_20_2__small redbricktiger

Ellington_small Peter_G

Cj_spiller_heisman_small F1NS

Clemson-tigers-fans_the_wave_small SJTill