SC is 6-1 and has played itself into position to have a BIG year. The Gamecocks need to win today as a lead-up to one of the biggest games in the SEC versus Tennessee next Saturday.
Being ranked sixth in the BCS poll makes any SC game BIG. And if the Gamecocks keep winning each game gets bigger.
The reason the Vandy game takes on more significance this year has more to do with the fear of a bad day than the competitiveness of the game.
SC also needs to work on getting better. The feeling is that SC has yet to play a complete and good game. Each week there seems to be lapses in the quality of play, so everybody is waiting for the Gamecocks to put it all together for four quarters. Until that happens there will be a heavy supply of doubters.
But if the Gamecocks don't slip up today, you have to believe that the advantage goes to Steve Spurrier next week when matched in a one-game situation against Phillip Fulmer.
Versus Tennessee, if Fulmer did not have David Cutcliffe back to bail him out, it would be somewhat easier for SC. But Cutcliffe is good and a difference-maker at Tennessee.
SC fans will be watching the Tennessee at Alabama game too.
Lou Holtz once said if a team is used to winning, you want them to win a week before you play them. Holtz also said it's better to play a team if they lost the week before, if they are used to losing. I'm not sure that applies to Tennessee. I'm hoping Alabama takes care of Tennessee. The Vols seem to have a little momentum with them. 'Bama could stop that, though it's more likely Tennessee will win.
While it is imperative that SC keeps winning, Clemson is in a very dangerous situation.
Coming off an embarrassing loss to at home, after another high-hopes start, TigerNation is in the "Here-we-go-again" mode for yet another year.
But usually the Tigers' schedule provides so many opportunities to get out of the losing rut, by playing the dregs of college football, Tommy Bowden extricates himself to the relieved shrieks of their fans.
That being said, Central Michigan has averaged around 50 points a game in winning its last three. So you have a team on a positive streak versus a team in Clemson, that could be hanging its head and has a hard time getting up for yet another of its many patsy games.
A Tiger loss to the Chippewas would end much of the speculation that Bowden will produce yet another rabbit from his hat.
And a slip-up by the Tigers today spells the onslaught of an era some have expected is long overdue at Clemson. There are those of us who have never believed Tommy Bowden was top-shelf, or anywhere near it, in the first place.
It's not likely, but today could provide evidence of a slope so precipitous, that Bowden's personal safety may be threatened by those who have bought into his line for years, and now feel like dupes.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Friday, October 19, 2007
Recruiting is a wild ride
Just look at the current headlines as it tells the story.
Usually, highly-touted recruits in the Palmetto State will keep both SC and Clemson on their list even if they are not planning on committing to one of them. High School coaches encourage the players to name the state schools as a possibility even if it is just a courtesy.
But the news linked below shows that LB Robert Quinn from the Lowcountry has no interest in Clemson and has decided early to not even humor the Tigers.
USC In, Clemson Out With Quinn
LB Robert Quinn (6-6 255) of Fort Dorchester has narrowed his list to a final six. USC made the cut, Clemson did not. http://www.goupstate.com/article/20071017/PSPORTS02/71017011/-1/psports
Is the true personality of the coaches at the state's two D-1 schools setting in?
The other link (below) is a story that hronicles the respect Emmanuel Cook and his family have for Steve Spurrier.
From the Story: Spurrier believed him, immediately going on the defensive on Cook's behalf. Cook said. As soon as his mother heard that Spurrier was her son's ally, she called to tell Cook that he'd made a great choice for a school. After cook was accused: "Spurrier believed him, immediately going on the defensive on Cook's behalf."
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/oct/19/hit_manfeeling_blessed_have_second_chanc19584/
Contrast the Spurrier/Cook scenario with the words of disgust C.J. Spiller's mom spoke about the Clemson coaching staff last winter when it was rumored that C.J. wanted out of Clemson, but would not be released by Bowden and Co.
It does not take a genius to figure out that success on the field draws recruits. But it should only be a fair that a coach who disgraces himself should be held accountable.
Note with Bowden the Tony Nelson episode. There, the Washington, DC-area kid was given a scholarship only to have it taken from him when Bowden got a higher-level recruit at the position. Nelson's family, high school coaches and the kid himself were left with a nasty taste of orange in their mouths, and they were not quiet about it, even if the South Carolina media more or less ignored it.
The Eric Young fiasco is another glimpse of Bowden's character. Young was the player who Bowden swore indicated he was a Clemson lock with an alleged "wink."
When Bowden was left with egg on his face as Young signed with Tennessee, Bowden sought to embarrass the kid by making the "wink" story public.
It worked, with Clemson fans anyway, as have many of Bowden's smoke-screens and excuses to discredit players and coaches to exalt himself.
But the Robert Quinn dis-respect of Clemson, C.J's drama and James Davis' criticism of Bowden during the time period of the North-South High School game last winter are all likely signs that Bowden's reputation is catching up to him.
Yes, the media, bending backwards, will tell us how "classy" Bowden is even if he continues to stumble and becomes more assailed. But it seems recruits and Bowden's own players know better.
Usually, highly-touted recruits in the Palmetto State will keep both SC and Clemson on their list even if they are not planning on committing to one of them. High School coaches encourage the players to name the state schools as a possibility even if it is just a courtesy.
But the news linked below shows that LB Robert Quinn from the Lowcountry has no interest in Clemson and has decided early to not even humor the Tigers.
USC In, Clemson Out With Quinn
LB Robert Quinn (6-6 255) of Fort Dorchester has narrowed his list to a final six. USC made the cut, Clemson did not. http://www.goupstate.com/article/20071017/PSPORTS02/71017011/-1/psports
Is the true personality of the coaches at the state's two D-1 schools setting in?
The other link (below) is a story that hronicles the respect Emmanuel Cook and his family have for Steve Spurrier.
From the Story: Spurrier believed him, immediately going on the defensive on Cook's behalf. Cook said. As soon as his mother heard that Spurrier was her son's ally, she called to tell Cook that he'd made a great choice for a school. After cook was accused: "Spurrier believed him, immediately going on the defensive on Cook's behalf."
http://www.charleston.net/news/2007/oct/19/hit_manfeeling_blessed_have_second_chanc19584/
Contrast the Spurrier/Cook scenario with the words of disgust C.J. Spiller's mom spoke about the Clemson coaching staff last winter when it was rumored that C.J. wanted out of Clemson, but would not be released by Bowden and Co.
It does not take a genius to figure out that success on the field draws recruits. But it should only be a fair that a coach who disgraces himself should be held accountable.
Note with Bowden the Tony Nelson episode. There, the Washington, DC-area kid was given a scholarship only to have it taken from him when Bowden got a higher-level recruit at the position. Nelson's family, high school coaches and the kid himself were left with a nasty taste of orange in their mouths, and they were not quiet about it, even if the South Carolina media more or less ignored it.
The Eric Young fiasco is another glimpse of Bowden's character. Young was the player who Bowden swore indicated he was a Clemson lock with an alleged "wink."
When Bowden was left with egg on his face as Young signed with Tennessee, Bowden sought to embarrass the kid by making the "wink" story public.
It worked, with Clemson fans anyway, as have many of Bowden's smoke-screens and excuses to discredit players and coaches to exalt himself.
But the Robert Quinn dis-respect of Clemson, C.J's drama and James Davis' criticism of Bowden during the time period of the North-South High School game last winter are all likely signs that Bowden's reputation is catching up to him.
Yes, the media, bending backwards, will tell us how "classy" Bowden is even if he continues to stumble and becomes more assailed. But it seems recruits and Bowden's own players know better.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
It would be great if Blake Mitchell catches fire
From newspaper reports, it seems Blake Mitchell is ready to take advantage of his playing time versus Vandy on Saturday. http://www.thestate.com/gamecocks/story/203942.html
For more than one reason, it would be a very good development if Blake plays like he did to close out the 2006 season.
One reason is that SC could use the points. Chris Smelley has done as well as he could be expected to do, but he still misses reads and he does not know the offense as well as Blake.
Many Gamecock fans get that sick feeling in the gut when Smelley gets into one of the three-and-out stretches. Also: it's not good for the defense to lose faith in the offense's ability to sustain a drive, and that leads to a near panic.
If a confident and capable Blake is on hand to spell Smelley, I think some of the pressure is lessened.
And if Blake were stake his claim and come back as the starter because he outplayed Smelley, that makes the team so much stronger and better.
As for Smelley, the experience he has gotten already is INVALUABLE, even if he does not play much more this year.
Another reason to pull for Blake: He has been around for some great wins. Tenn. and Fla. 2005. He was terrible versus Clemson, but recovered and walked off the Tigers' field with a smile while Clemson's can't-miss blue chip athletes buried their faces and cried. And what about the Liberty Bowl, that was good times.
And the idea that a seat on the bench makes Blake a better player is not foreign. I remember the 2005 back-and-forth Vandy game, in which Blake was relieved by Syvelle Newton, only to come back a drive for the win after Syvelle was hurt. Even in the loss to Arkansas 2006, Blake was amazing.
If Blake leaves without at least getting another shot at QB, it would be a bit sad. It would be better for him to leave on a positive note.
All that said: has Blake let us down at times?...Yes. But maybe he can make us forget that.
Of course, Blake may get his shot, stumble...and that will be the end of it. But it's not a bad idea to hope he plays so well, he retains the job.
For more than one reason, it would be a very good development if Blake plays like he did to close out the 2006 season.
One reason is that SC could use the points. Chris Smelley has done as well as he could be expected to do, but he still misses reads and he does not know the offense as well as Blake.
Many Gamecock fans get that sick feeling in the gut when Smelley gets into one of the three-and-out stretches. Also: it's not good for the defense to lose faith in the offense's ability to sustain a drive, and that leads to a near panic.
If a confident and capable Blake is on hand to spell Smelley, I think some of the pressure is lessened.
And if Blake were stake his claim and come back as the starter because he outplayed Smelley, that makes the team so much stronger and better.
As for Smelley, the experience he has gotten already is INVALUABLE, even if he does not play much more this year.
Another reason to pull for Blake: He has been around for some great wins. Tenn. and Fla. 2005. He was terrible versus Clemson, but recovered and walked off the Tigers' field with a smile while Clemson's can't-miss blue chip athletes buried their faces and cried. And what about the Liberty Bowl, that was good times.
And the idea that a seat on the bench makes Blake a better player is not foreign. I remember the 2005 back-and-forth Vandy game, in which Blake was relieved by Syvelle Newton, only to come back a drive for the win after Syvelle was hurt. Even in the loss to Arkansas 2006, Blake was amazing.
If Blake leaves without at least getting another shot at QB, it would be a bit sad. It would be better for him to leave on a positive note.
All that said: has Blake let us down at times?...Yes. But maybe he can make us forget that.
Of course, Blake may get his shot, stumble...and that will be the end of it. But it's not a bad idea to hope he plays so well, he retains the job.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
SC is No. 6 so now the media focus is on undeserved rankings
Imagine that. South Carolina moves to No. 6 in the BCS polls and the topic of conversation quickly turns to teams that are undeserving of their ranking (i.e. SC.)
We have to look no further than our old friend Ron "MoRon" Morris http://www.gogamecocks.com/index.php/site/daily_article/for_truer_rankings_coaches_discount_spurrier_aura/
to read: If truth be known, the coaches, and their poll, recognize USC is not the sixth-best team in the country.
Of course there never was any debate over the legitimacy of the polls when Clemson climbed to lofty heights after blowing out the likes of Temple and Florida Atlantic last year. As a matter of fact MoRon opined a year ago, that Clemson's win over a putrid John Bunting UNC squad was evidence of the team's greatness.
And MoRon, although he is the most likely and usual suspect to rush to an argument to discount SC, he is not the only one.
Last night on Sportstalk, K-Mac, rolled his eyes (according to Phil) when the idea that SC may be a contender was broached. K-Mac was fervent in his pleas that SC is over-rated. This media lockstep and thought process is hatched and grows right there in downtown Clemson. Read the words on Gamecock Central about Mickey Plyer from WCCP-Clemson radio. The Clemson rank and file are drunk with the belief that SC is undeserving. Of course they could be right. But my problem is the negative gang mentality that takes over anytime SC accomplishes something.
Could SC be over-rated?....YES...
But the rush to make the Clemson-think mindset the order of the day is appalling, yet par for the course with this state's media.
Why is it done? An ingrained inability to respect SC is one reason. Many local media people are just too lazy to think that things have changed for the SC program. The cliched thinking that permeates The State newspaper's "Old Guard" is the easy way out. And many accept that instead of thinking for themselves.
Also: focusing on SC in a negative way takes attention away from Clemson and gives Tommy Bowden a better opportunity to correct the mediocrity that has set in up there.
.
We have to look no further than our old friend Ron "MoRon" Morris http://www.gogamecocks.com/index.php/site/daily_article/for_truer_rankings_coaches_discount_spurrier_aura/
to read: If truth be known, the coaches, and their poll, recognize USC is not the sixth-best team in the country.
Of course there never was any debate over the legitimacy of the polls when Clemson climbed to lofty heights after blowing out the likes of Temple and Florida Atlantic last year. As a matter of fact MoRon opined a year ago, that Clemson's win over a putrid John Bunting UNC squad was evidence of the team's greatness.
And MoRon, although he is the most likely and usual suspect to rush to an argument to discount SC, he is not the only one.
Last night on Sportstalk, K-Mac, rolled his eyes (according to Phil) when the idea that SC may be a contender was broached. K-Mac was fervent in his pleas that SC is over-rated. This media lockstep and thought process is hatched and grows right there in downtown Clemson. Read the words on Gamecock Central about Mickey Plyer from WCCP-Clemson radio. The Clemson rank and file are drunk with the belief that SC is undeserving. Of course they could be right. But my problem is the negative gang mentality that takes over anytime SC accomplishes something.
Could SC be over-rated?....YES...
But the rush to make the Clemson-think mindset the order of the day is appalling, yet par for the course with this state's media.
Why is it done? An ingrained inability to respect SC is one reason. Many local media people are just too lazy to think that things have changed for the SC program. The cliched thinking that permeates The State newspaper's "Old Guard" is the easy way out. And many accept that instead of thinking for themselves.
Also: focusing on SC in a negative way takes attention away from Clemson and gives Tommy Bowden a better opportunity to correct the mediocrity that has set in up there.
.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
The State newspaper having trouble admitting reality
Last week it seemed that The State newspaper was coming around and being a little more accurate in the reporting about SC football. Upon further review (after, and before) the big KY. win, it seems The State just cannot break its penchant to downplay SC's accomplishments. The State, after the Clemson loss to GT, also seems to be having a hard time believing that Clemson fans are grumbling about all of the Tigers' problems. The same problems The State has overlooked for months, in hopes that they would go away.
This does not even mention the color, full-page spread that was offered by The State on Andre Woodson (the opponents' QB) on the day of the big game with the Wildcats.
This is just a spot check of The State's Web site and as usual found some samples of their tactics.
UK fumbles, Norwood rumbles
http://www.thestate.com/gamecocks/story/192400.html
Notice that Kentucky fumbled the game away. Even though the Gamecock scores came on overwhelming team defense or TAKEAWAYS, it was Norwood, a single player's name in the headline. When USC wins, you'll see The State do this a good bit. The newspaper's sports editors seem to go out of their way not to promote USC as a team. Unless you were looking for the article, you would not know it was about SC beating 8th ranked Kentucky.
USC preps for UK’s air raid
http://www.thestate.com/gamecocks/story/189198.html
In this one, when USC is highlighted, it more or less says, the Gamecocks are the ones on the defensive for the aggressive UK passing attack or RAID that rain down on the SC secondary. Of course, SC is No. 1 in the country in Pass D, which is not mentioned in the headline.
But when it's Clemson
Harper aims to pick pockets of ‘robbers’
http://www.thestate.com/tigers/story/192177.html
This is saying (we hate to admit) VT has some good DBs, Then, they go on to imply that surgeon Cullen Harper (based on NOTHING) has something for that stout defense of the Hokies. He plans to pick their pockets. This is a positive spin on what could be the Tigers' undoing. It is a defensive and positive spin for Harper, who was helpless versus GT. The VT D would get a full-page spread if the Hokies were coming to play SC.
Loss opens line of inquiry
http://www.thestate.com/tigers/story/192178.html
This column is a defense of Clemson's fat and weak OL. This headline (that should intimate Clemson's OL sucks) is worthless. And in the piece, the writer apologetically beats around the bush and finally, with his trademark sophomoric language, tells you that the Clemson line got its BEEP kicked at GT. Then he rains down the excuses. But because of his apologist stance, it takes him 3 graphs to spit out the unpleasant subject he obviously hates to broach.
This is a pathetic attempt to cover up a weakness that the State would have harped on for weeks if it were SC. (it did.)
The columnist, is dinosaur Bob Spear, who dusts off the mold on his jacket and opines every August, using that tired cliché about SC fans being nothing but eternal hopefuls of football grandeur. You know the obligatory "Hope Springs Eternal column is razor-edged mind has written since Paul Dietzel paced the sidelines at WB.
This does not even mention the color, full-page spread that was offered by The State on Andre Woodson (the opponents' QB) on the day of the big game with the Wildcats.
This is just a spot check of The State's Web site and as usual found some samples of their tactics.
UK fumbles, Norwood rumbles
http://www.thestate.com/gamecocks/story/192400.html
Notice that Kentucky fumbled the game away. Even though the Gamecock scores came on overwhelming team defense or TAKEAWAYS, it was Norwood, a single player's name in the headline. When USC wins, you'll see The State do this a good bit. The newspaper's sports editors seem to go out of their way not to promote USC as a team. Unless you were looking for the article, you would not know it was about SC beating 8th ranked Kentucky.
USC preps for UK’s air raid
http://www.thestate.com/gamecocks/story/189198.html
In this one, when USC is highlighted, it more or less says, the Gamecocks are the ones on the defensive for the aggressive UK passing attack or RAID that rain down on the SC secondary. Of course, SC is No. 1 in the country in Pass D, which is not mentioned in the headline.
But when it's Clemson
Harper aims to pick pockets of ‘robbers’
http://www.thestate.com/tigers/story/192177.html
This is saying (we hate to admit) VT has some good DBs, Then, they go on to imply that surgeon Cullen Harper (based on NOTHING) has something for that stout defense of the Hokies. He plans to pick their pockets. This is a positive spin on what could be the Tigers' undoing. It is a defensive and positive spin for Harper, who was helpless versus GT. The VT D would get a full-page spread if the Hokies were coming to play SC.
Loss opens line of inquiry
http://www.thestate.com/tigers/story/192178.html
This column is a defense of Clemson's fat and weak OL. This headline (that should intimate Clemson's OL sucks) is worthless. And in the piece, the writer apologetically beats around the bush and finally, with his trademark sophomoric language, tells you that the Clemson line got its BEEP kicked at GT. Then he rains down the excuses. But because of his apologist stance, it takes him 3 graphs to spit out the unpleasant subject he obviously hates to broach.
This is a pathetic attempt to cover up a weakness that the State would have harped on for weeks if it were SC. (it did.)
The columnist, is dinosaur Bob Spear, who dusts off the mold on his jacket and opines every August, using that tired cliché about SC fans being nothing but eternal hopefuls of football grandeur. You know the obligatory "Hope Springs Eternal column is razor-edged mind has written since Paul Dietzel paced the sidelines at WB.
Friday, October 5, 2007
ACC as usual - No reason to believe VT can win
When you look at the laugher Clemson turned in versus VT in 2006, it was easy to chalk up VT as another loss for Clemson in 07.
The ACC is very low on legitimate Division-1 teams, but VT has seemed to be the one team that has not fallen completely apart since joining the hapless assemblage of mediocrity known as the ACC.
On second thought, SCREEECH....check that respect for VT at the door.
After struggling to beat a pretty poor East Carolina squad, the Hokies looked like Division 1-AA versus the SEC's leader, LSU. Of course the college football world has come to expect SEC teams to handle teams from mid-major level conferences, but the 48-7 embarrassment the Bengal Tigers stuck on VT surprised many.
So now the Hokies come to Clemson with a ranking and some belief that they are a viable opponent.
I don't buy it. Maybe UNC is better, and getting better, each week, but the fact that the Hokies only beat the Tar Heels by a 17-10 score is not much to be impressed over.
I have little faith that VT will be able to come anywhere near the shellacking the Hokies laid on the Tigers in 2006, in a game where a distraught Clemson fan threw a bottle and hit his hapless coach, Tommy Bowden.
(An aside. Funny how that incident was dropped and the accusations against the VT Police stopped, once it was learned a Tiger fan threw the bottle, instead of a Hokie. But so it is with anything or any news "unpleasant" about the undercurrents that rage and threaten Clemson.
And another fact that seems to become more apparent with the changing colors of the leaves, the ACC just gets weaker and weaker, leaving us who want to see Tommy Bowden exposed, wanting as each week plays out.
I must admit, I've just about stopped making predictions about Tommy's sure implosion because (as Moe the Rooster said) "It's hard to lose with the stuff he use."
Yes, playing nobody is a sure path to an endless string of 6,7 and 8-win seasons. And Tommy has made a career out of that, to adoring fans.
And there is no reason to believe that VT will again deliver that crushing blow that ignites the orange-robed lynch mob toward Tommy and Brad's front door.
Of course, I'll watch the game, hanging on every Tiger miscue and stumble, but I expect in the end, I'll be disappointed.
Yes, dissatisfied that Clemson wins, but even more frustrated that the Tigers simply used its 85,000 zombies to take down yet another over-rated pretender while the media drools about the excellent football that is on display.
The ACC is very low on legitimate Division-1 teams, but VT has seemed to be the one team that has not fallen completely apart since joining the hapless assemblage of mediocrity known as the ACC.
On second thought, SCREEECH....check that respect for VT at the door.
After struggling to beat a pretty poor East Carolina squad, the Hokies looked like Division 1-AA versus the SEC's leader, LSU. Of course the college football world has come to expect SEC teams to handle teams from mid-major level conferences, but the 48-7 embarrassment the Bengal Tigers stuck on VT surprised many.
So now the Hokies come to Clemson with a ranking and some belief that they are a viable opponent.
I don't buy it. Maybe UNC is better, and getting better, each week, but the fact that the Hokies only beat the Tar Heels by a 17-10 score is not much to be impressed over.
I have little faith that VT will be able to come anywhere near the shellacking the Hokies laid on the Tigers in 2006, in a game where a distraught Clemson fan threw a bottle and hit his hapless coach, Tommy Bowden.
(An aside. Funny how that incident was dropped and the accusations against the VT Police stopped, once it was learned a Tiger fan threw the bottle, instead of a Hokie. But so it is with anything or any news "unpleasant" about the undercurrents that rage and threaten Clemson.
And another fact that seems to become more apparent with the changing colors of the leaves, the ACC just gets weaker and weaker, leaving us who want to see Tommy Bowden exposed, wanting as each week plays out.
I must admit, I've just about stopped making predictions about Tommy's sure implosion because (as Moe the Rooster said) "It's hard to lose with the stuff he use."
Yes, playing nobody is a sure path to an endless string of 6,7 and 8-win seasons. And Tommy has made a career out of that, to adoring fans.
And there is no reason to believe that VT will again deliver that crushing blow that ignites the orange-robed lynch mob toward Tommy and Brad's front door.
Of course, I'll watch the game, hanging on every Tiger miscue and stumble, but I expect in the end, I'll be disappointed.
Yes, dissatisfied that Clemson wins, but even more frustrated that the Tigers simply used its 85,000 zombies to take down yet another over-rated pretender while the media drools about the excellent football that is on display.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Were Clemson fans foolish to believe Tommy, media again?
A week ago, Ron "MoRon" Morris was making the case that Clemson has the fastest skill players in America and all is rosy in Tigertown. http://www.thestate.com/tigers/story/185931.html
Morris opined that the insertion of Cullen Harper had solved all of the Tigers' problems of a year ago.
And it's not just MoRon. Other media members, as is their tradition in this state, simply glossed over some very important personnel isues at Clemson.
What MoRon and the media left out:
Clemson Offensive line: if you watched Clemson vs FSU, when the two linemen who came out of the game, looked to me to be soft and kind of fat. And they did not look all that big (of course I'm used to seeing SEC linemen week after week.) Still, was it not foolhardy to think Clemson would be better at O-line in 07 than in 06. The Tigers lost Roman Fry (which is when their problems began last year) Nathan Bennett and Dustin Fry, and maybe a couple more from last year. That was Clemson's best O-line under Tommy Bowden. For Clemson fans to think they would not see a drop-off in 07 was unrealistic. I have not heard, but I wonder if Clemson fans are finally ready to recognize OL coach Brad Scott for his true coaching talents, which are lacking.
WR: Aaron Kelley has been a little surprising (that he has looked capable a couple time) since the trend at Clemson for a few years has been underachievement at WR. That trend began about the time Rick Stockstill bolted the program (K. Grant, Rendrick Taylor....etc.) But Kelley's progress may simply be the result of soft competition. Chansi Stuckey was more of a self-made player and it was not rational to think his absence would not be a big loss.
RB: James Davis and CJ Spiller are talented, but probably not anywhere near the best tandem in the country. MoRon, in is column (linked above) said media members laughed when Tommy Bowden credited RBs Mike Davis and Cory Boyd as possibly being in the same class with Clemson's duo. And knowing Bowden's character (or lack of it) he probably was trying to draw a laugh and make fun of SC's RBs. But if his RBs had the heart and toughness of Davis and Boyd, he may not be facing another year in fear of termination. Tommy's RBs can go down surprisingly easily when things go south, as they always seem to do during the season.
QB: Harper, may (or may not) be a little better than Will Procter, but he is a lot like Proctor. He looks great when there is no rush on him, versus an inferior opponent (most of Clemson's schedule.) But he is not a big-play guy. When you consider that Mike O'Cain brought in Charlie Whitehurst, you have to wonder if Bowden has any idea about recruiting, or coaching, the type QB he needs. Harper will throw into double coverage, too, but it has not hurt him much because of the level of the defenses he has played against. And Harper takes horrendous sacks. How familiar does that sound?
Defensive line: Phillip Merling, the nephew of Clemson assistant coach Chris Rumph (a former SC player) is a talent. You just wonder if he was worth the bargaining of a job to get Merling to sign at Clemson. Ricky Sapp has looked good, but there is not a lot after that. Gaines Adams won a game or two for Clemson. I don't think they have that type player on the D-line this year. The departure of Coach Hobby two years ago continues to haunt the D-line and may make the hiring of Rumph, who had sparse experience, even more pronounced.
LBs: I have not studied this group enough to be too analytical, but nothing I've seem makes me believe that it is anything special as a group. Nor is there a player that stands out.
Defensive secondary: With the loss of CJ Gaddis (left early) Hill and Fudge, it was not likely there would be improvement in the secondary. And that is likely to remain the case, except it may be even worse in 07.
PK: Hats of to Mark Buchholz for attempting after the way Jad Dean was treated by Tommy Bowden last year. But the kid needs to pick football or soccer. And you have to wonder what kind of coach would keep sending him out there, miss after miss, versus GT, unless the cupboard is completely empty up there.
Return team: Ford is a threat and should be feared as a return man, but his durability is likely fleeting. If he has gold medal speed (probably does) he should drop football and go to where his bacon is. Kelley may end up losing (fumble) a game before it's over. To risk Davis or Spiller at return, regularly, is just stupid or desperate.
Punt team: Already lost one game for them. How many more will they lose? And why is this a persistent problem under Tommy Bowden.
Morris opined that the insertion of Cullen Harper had solved all of the Tigers' problems of a year ago.
And it's not just MoRon. Other media members, as is their tradition in this state, simply glossed over some very important personnel isues at Clemson.
What MoRon and the media left out:
Clemson Offensive line: if you watched Clemson vs FSU, when the two linemen who came out of the game, looked to me to be soft and kind of fat. And they did not look all that big (of course I'm used to seeing SEC linemen week after week.) Still, was it not foolhardy to think Clemson would be better at O-line in 07 than in 06. The Tigers lost Roman Fry (which is when their problems began last year) Nathan Bennett and Dustin Fry, and maybe a couple more from last year. That was Clemson's best O-line under Tommy Bowden. For Clemson fans to think they would not see a drop-off in 07 was unrealistic. I have not heard, but I wonder if Clemson fans are finally ready to recognize OL coach Brad Scott for his true coaching talents, which are lacking.
WR: Aaron Kelley has been a little surprising (that he has looked capable a couple time) since the trend at Clemson for a few years has been underachievement at WR. That trend began about the time Rick Stockstill bolted the program (K. Grant, Rendrick Taylor....etc.) But Kelley's progress may simply be the result of soft competition. Chansi Stuckey was more of a self-made player and it was not rational to think his absence would not be a big loss.
RB: James Davis and CJ Spiller are talented, but probably not anywhere near the best tandem in the country. MoRon, in is column (linked above) said media members laughed when Tommy Bowden credited RBs Mike Davis and Cory Boyd as possibly being in the same class with Clemson's duo. And knowing Bowden's character (or lack of it) he probably was trying to draw a laugh and make fun of SC's RBs. But if his RBs had the heart and toughness of Davis and Boyd, he may not be facing another year in fear of termination. Tommy's RBs can go down surprisingly easily when things go south, as they always seem to do during the season.
QB: Harper, may (or may not) be a little better than Will Procter, but he is a lot like Proctor. He looks great when there is no rush on him, versus an inferior opponent (most of Clemson's schedule.) But he is not a big-play guy. When you consider that Mike O'Cain brought in Charlie Whitehurst, you have to wonder if Bowden has any idea about recruiting, or coaching, the type QB he needs. Harper will throw into double coverage, too, but it has not hurt him much because of the level of the defenses he has played against. And Harper takes horrendous sacks. How familiar does that sound?
Defensive line: Phillip Merling, the nephew of Clemson assistant coach Chris Rumph (a former SC player) is a talent. You just wonder if he was worth the bargaining of a job to get Merling to sign at Clemson. Ricky Sapp has looked good, but there is not a lot after that. Gaines Adams won a game or two for Clemson. I don't think they have that type player on the D-line this year. The departure of Coach Hobby two years ago continues to haunt the D-line and may make the hiring of Rumph, who had sparse experience, even more pronounced.
LBs: I have not studied this group enough to be too analytical, but nothing I've seem makes me believe that it is anything special as a group. Nor is there a player that stands out.
Defensive secondary: With the loss of CJ Gaddis (left early) Hill and Fudge, it was not likely there would be improvement in the secondary. And that is likely to remain the case, except it may be even worse in 07.
PK: Hats of to Mark Buchholz for attempting after the way Jad Dean was treated by Tommy Bowden last year. But the kid needs to pick football or soccer. And you have to wonder what kind of coach would keep sending him out there, miss after miss, versus GT, unless the cupboard is completely empty up there.
Return team: Ford is a threat and should be feared as a return man, but his durability is likely fleeting. If he has gold medal speed (probably does) he should drop football and go to where his bacon is. Kelley may end up losing (fumble) a game before it's over. To risk Davis or Spiller at return, regularly, is just stupid or desperate.
Punt team: Already lost one game for them. How many more will they lose? And why is this a persistent problem under Tommy Bowden.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)