No idea why you are bringing up Georgia, which was a game I said Quinn played well in. I characterized Quinn and the defense's game the same. They played well, but failed to make critical plays in critical moments
#1. Love the attempt to pretend Clemson had a run game.
#2 Taking out Klubnick is interesting considering he had more called runs than any RB (and I mean called runs). Clemson had 11 runs in total by someone not named Klubnick. Do you think it is logical to take the leading carrier out of rushing game? Not going to go back and take the scramble/sacks out of Klubnick's game, but he had more called carries than any other player.
#3 Clemson ran 43 pass plays and 24 runs, that is 67 plays. Klubnick has 56 plays that is 83.5% of the plays. That is a crazy usage rate. Quinn was 70.3% and 64.4% vs Georgia.
#4 Success. Klubnick led Clemson to 24 pts with a crazy usage rate vs a defense that averaged giving up 12.5. I was happy they didnt let Klubnick throw on that last goal line series. He put up 3 TDs passes vs a defense that gave up .29 TD passes a game prior. He put up 336 yards vs a defense that averaged giving up 143.07 yards the prior 13 games (211 being the prior high). He did all of that in a game where his defense was struggling. Trust me if Quinn doubled up Georgia's average pts allowed (20.5), this thread would have been much different.
My comment on Klubnick being the QB was based on the usage rate and success he had vs Texas. Apparently I have a lot more respect for the Texas defense than you do. Ewers had a very good game, but he was not asked to do a lot vs Clemson, because Texas was dominant running the ball. You do not have to agree