I have not seen this picked up anywhere so I thought I'd post it here. I'm really pulling for this young man to succeed. Hopefully the NCAA will grant him a waiver.

GRIDIRON DREAM SITE IS CLEMSON

By ADAM HIMMELSBACH

When Sgt. Daniel Rodriguez was serving in Afghanistan, he promised Pfc. Kevin Thomson that he would chase his dream of becoming a college football player. Thomson was killed in battle on Oct. 3, 2009, and Rodriguez, a 2006 Brooke Point High School graduate, has been determined to keep his word ever since. This past weekend, he moved one step closer to his goal of playing for a major Division I football team by committing to Clemson.

More here.

Ed Note: Fanpost recap

via images.tigernet.com

I called for an "at worst" of taking 2 of 3 from Maine, and go figure, that's what happens. We came out flat again and Clemson had to scramble after another series opening loss to win the last two games and the series. Don't get me wrong, two of three is two of three and I'll take it. If this happens in every series this year, Clemson is looking at a weekend record of 32-16; throw in a few midweek victories on top of that and we're looking at a solid year. IF this were a super regional and Clemson won the last two games after losing the first, we're talking about going to Omaha. However, this is Maine. MAINE. They're a solid team that can swing the sticks, but also a team that Clemson should have swept, if the flashes of what our batting lineup COULD be are any indication. After the series with UAB, it appeared as though pitching was going to carry this team. A week and a knocked-around pitching staff later, and this team is inconsistent as can be. It's impossible to tell coming into any given game whether Clemson is going to get a lights out performance from a starting pitcher, or if he's going to get shelled. Is Clemson going to wait until the 7th inning to score and then only put up 1 run, or are they going to put up 2 runs, 2 runs, and then a 5 spot in consecutive innings? Nobody knows at this point, and consistency is going to be a necessity, especially with a series against the second-ranked coots coming up this weekend. Clemson is going to need some aspect of the game to lean on in order to succeed not only in this coming series, but the rest of the season.

Details of the games after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

via images.tigernet.com

The Clemson Tigers (2-1) are set to take on the Maine Black Bears, who are opening up their season this weekend, in a three game series at Doug Kingsmore Stadium. Because Maine didn't play last weekend, there are no numbers to look at as far as what kind of team they have this year. However, Maine is coming off of a 33-24 season that ended in the Chapel Hill regional, where they went 1-2, losing 4-0 to North Carolina's #2 pitcher (#1 in ERA). They reached the NCAA tournament by winning the America East tournament, and were the only AE team represented in the NCAA's. They were a generally competitive team, going 15-18 outside of their conference, which showed that they were no pushover when playing outside the America East.

Specifics after the jump.....

Continue reading this post »

Ed Note: Fanpost moved to the front page, from an auditioning writer

Friday - UAB: 2, Clemson: 1

Execution, execution, execution. It is the key to success in baseball. Executing the little things (making the routine defensive plays, hitting the cutoff man, throwing strikes on the mound, getting bunts down and hitting behind runners) often end up being the difference in games, regardless of talent level. That fact reared its ugly head Friday afternoon as Clemson lost its opening game of the season for the first time since 2004, a 2-1 decision to Alabama-Birmingham. Coming into this season after losing 5 starters in the lineup, we all knew that offense was going to be hard to find, at least early on. However, even if Clemson’s performance was due to opening day jitters (a possibility with that many new players), it didn’t make Friday’s game any easier to watch. A combined 0-for-12 effort from your top 4 hitters (McGibbon in the 5 spot was also 0-for-2 with a walk) is going to result in a loss every single time, barring a miracle performance from your pitcher. Clemson just could not execute the fundamentals necessary to get runners over and drive them in. At one point early in the game, Clemson had runners on 2nd and 3rd with nobody out, and instead of getting a sacrifice fly or even a simple ground ball to a middle infielder to plate a run, our guys hit three straight pop ups. That is hardly the result you expect from a team that is supposed to rely on small ball and execution to win their games. Spencer Kieboom started off the season strong, leading the team with a 2-for-3 effort, but he simply cannot be the only one to produce. Offensive performances like that result in one run and a loss to a team that shouldn’t be on the same field with Clemson.

One bright spot from this game (and the series as a whole) was the pitching and defense. UAB had some guys that could put the bat on the ball and Kevin Brady looked very solid in his five innings of work. He scattered 4 hits and only walked two in those five innings, showing good control in his first start since leaving early against South Carolina last year. Matt Campbell followed him and gave three decent innings of work while giving up one run. True freshman Daniel Gossett came on and pitched well in his first ever action as a Tiger; his ninth inning effort kept Clemson in position to come back and tie the game. Clemson also did not make an error, even with an entirely new outfield and two new starters on the right side of the infield. This is a refreshing fact after last year’s defensive lapses.

This game was rough to watch, as Clemson simply should not lose to UAB. The pitching and defense were good enough to keep the Tigers in the game, but the dud performances from the top of the lineup is ultimately what cost them the victory on Opening Day.

We'll look at the Saturday double header...after the jump.

Continue reading this post »

Syracuse and PITT will be cross divisonal rivals... ACC to 9 game conf schedule.. everything else pretty much the same..... Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. (theACC.com) - Atlantic Coast Conference Commissioner John Swofford announced today the future scheduling formats as approved by the ACC's Faculty Athletic Representatives and Athletics Directors. The announcement was made following the annual ACC Winter Meetings and will go in effect once Pittsburgh and Syracuse become playing members in the conference. "We have been engaged in discussions on the various options for integrating Pitt and Syracuse since early fall," said ACC Commissioner John Swofford. "It's a tremendous tribute to the leadership at our schools that we will be able to seamlessly add Pitt and Syracuse at the appropriate time when they become full playing members." A breakdown of the future scheduling models include: Football: The Atlantic and Coastal divisions will remain the same with Syracuse joining the Atlantic and Pitt joining the Coastal. The current primary crossover partners will remain consistent with Syracuse and Pitt becoming primary crossover partners with each other. When Pitt and Syracuse join the ACC, the league will play a nine-game conference schedule. The format will consist of each team playing all six in its division each year, plus its primary crossover partner each year and two rotating opponents from the opposite division. This six-year cycle allows each team to play each divisional opponent and its primary crossover partner six times (three home and three away) while also playing each rotating crossover opponent two times (one home and one away).

We all use statistics to form our opinion.

We use statistics because we believe them to be objective and to tell the story from a point of view that cannot be disputed (sans Wilt Chamberlain’s claim, of course).

If I had to summarize what I have posted over the previous four parts in just two statistics it would be these.

The average scoring defensive rank of a “top ten team in plays run” over the past 5 years is 60.3

The average rank of the “top ten scoring defenses” in “offensive plays run” is 85.2

I like these two the best because they encapsulate 100 years of football evolution that says that a coach can choose to use his offense to control the clock and keep his defense off the field to keep them rested and hungry (Bryant, Ford, Saban).

Or, you can choose not to, as we have chosen at Clemson, and choose to win “Offense First.” You can take rest and opportunity from your own defense and use it to put more pressure on the opposing defense.

I’m not saying that when the defense gets mudstomped, it’s the offense fault. It’s not the offense’s fault.

It’s the offense’s fault when they don’t double-mudstomp the opposing defense.

Continue reading this post »

We’ve looked at offense and defense “per possession.” Now, let’s look at overall production (offense + defense) to gauge how well the offensive philosophy change is working to make Clemson a better football team overall.

There is a lot of information here so feel free to read this in increments.

We saw in part 1, how teams that run offensive plays at the rate we do typically have defenses in the bottom half of the national rankings. The thought process here is that it’s ok to adapt an offensive philosophy that diminishes defensive performance as long as the offensive gains out-weight the defensive losses.

Unfortunately, it is difficult to assign a clear value as to what those defensive losses should be. It’s even more difficult to separate philosophy, depth, talent, and scheme issues to come up with a quantitative value of where we should be. What we know is that at Clemson there is about a 6% difference in “per possession” production between getting a raise and getting fired as a defensive coordinator.

Now we’re looking at the combined level of “per possession” effectiveness to gauge how much more effective The Tigers have become as a team.

Continue reading this post »

Ed.: Fanpost from a reader who tried the Batson Program

Dr. B: I really enjoyed your article on Batson's S&C program and wanted to give you my personal experience with it.

I graduated from Clemson in 2003 and my brother tried out for the team in 2004, when he was a freshman. He played football in high school at Northwestern, under Moose Wallace, so he was very experienced with being in a S&C program, albeit at the high school level. My brother, at the time, was 6'0" and weighed 200 lb. and was solid as a rock. Long story short, he didn't make the Clemson team that year but was given the S&C manual from Batson, who encouraged him to come back the following year. I'm sure you have seen this manual, all 100+ pages of it. It’s like a phone book, and very intimidating to someone who has never had a manual of this proportion before.

My brother asked me if I'd like to do the program with him, and being a 24 year old with nothing better to do than work I said sure. Me, personally, I was 5'9" and weighed 140 lb. at the time so I wanted to get ripped like the football players. We followed all of the instructions in the manual, including the speed/agility sections.

When we got to the lifting portion is where the problems quickly emerged. The whole lifting program was nothing but bench press, umpteen thousand variations of squats, and numerous shoulder presses. Absolutely little to no core work was employed here.

My brother and I did the program for roughly 3 months, and while we both got significantly bigger mass and strength gains, there were some other severe consequences, which I know you have well documented. My shoulders are now permanently damaged and I have lower back problems. My brother ruined his back and had to have surgery to repair his wrists, which to this day are still not as strong as they used to be.

I say this because it is plain as day to me why Willy Korn, Cullen Harper, James Davis, and now I fear Watkins will have permanent damage to their shoulders and I don't think this is a coincidence. Same goes for JK Jay and Kalon Davis with back problems. I will mention that my brother and I were under no trained supervision from any one, which could indicate we were not practicing proper form. However, with my brother being an experienced lifter, with over 6 years of experience at that time, I don’t think this was a huge issue as we spotted each other and used weight belts and wrist supports.

I have since completed the P90X program, which definitely stresses core work for stability and to me is a much better program (because I'm not a fine tuned athlete) than Batson's program. I really appreciate you hammering on this topic because it is a shame that the athletes that come through our program are at substantially greater risk to injury because of Batson's inept S&C program.

Take Care, AC

Alright, that’s enough dwelling on our defensive futility, let’s examine the brightspot of 2011, the offensive side of the ball. Last time we looked at how our defense performed “per possession” over the past few years. Now we are going to look at the offense.

First, let’s review through Part 2 by the numbers:

The average defensive rank of the “top ten team in plays run” is 82.3

The average defensive rank of a “top ten team in plays run” over the past 5 years is 60.3

In the first year of Malzahn’s offensive philosophy Auburn’s defense dropped 58 spots to 73.

In the first year in Morris’ offensive philosophy, Clemson’s defense dropped 70 spots to 81

In 2011, Clemson’s defense dropped in “stop rate per possession” 6.25%

In year one in Malzahn’s system, Auburn’s defense dropped in “stop rate per possession” 10.57%

Auburn’s National Championship defense out-performed Clemson 2011 “per possession” by 1.82%

Oregon’s National Runner –Up defense out-performed Clemson 2011 by 10.36%

The logic here remains the same as Part 1-2. The offense and the defense are married to each other and work together to help the team win. Their effectiveness is linked together. If the defense can get off the field quickly, it increases the effectiveness of our offense by creating more stress for the opposing defense and more possessions for them to defend.

Continue reading this post »

Again, this one is a lot of information so, take your time and don’t hesitate to stop and come back later. I’ll give you a few days before I post part 3.

In part 1, we saw how running more plays attributes greatly to poor statistical defense and we examined some accomplished defensive coordinators that were unable to overcome it. Again, my goal here is to affect perception and to better allow all of us (including myself) to become better educated football fans.

After researching for part 1, it occurred to me that our offensive philosophy might affect the defense but, I’m pretty sure I never saw Kevin Steele and Homer Simpson together…coincidence? And wait, didn’t Auburn just win the National Title with Malzahn using this same offensive philosophy? Yes, they sure did. Let’s look at that. Let’s use Auburn as the control. Not only do they use our system, they won the national championship with it.

As you probably already know, in 2003, Chad Morris and his high school staff met with Gus Malzahn to borrow his big picture offensive philosophy. Since then, the two have skyrocketed from coaching high school to becoming the "highest paid offensive coordinators" in FBS football.

Continue reading this post »