Jump to content

2024 CFP Playoffs Round 1: Texas vs. Clemson - 3:00pm on TNT


Pancho

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Hookem2147 said:

Our first possession of the third quarter took up almost half the quarter. 14 plays, 71 yards. Had 1st and goal from the 5 and had to settle for a FG. Tough but I’d call that a good start to the half. Then the defense immediately forces a 3 and out and we get the ball back with 5:30 left in the quarter up 31-0. We immediately go 3 and out with the patented low line drive punt from Kern allowing for Clemson to start from their own 45. 4 plays, 55 yards, TD. We get the ball back. 16 yard pass to Helm, Golden PI for 15 yards, Blue run for 8 yards. 2nd and 2 and we get our first penalty of the game which basically kills the drive. Ends on the 4th and 2 incomplete pass.

Lose the quarter 7-3.

Ok, cool. 
Hook ‘Em

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hookem2147 said:

Our first possession of the third quarter took up almost half the quarter. 14 plays, 71 yards. Had 1st and goal from the 5 and had to settle for a FG. Tough but I’d call that a good start to the half. Then the defense immediately forces a 3 and out and we get the ball back with 5:30 left in the quarter up 31-0. We immediately go 3 and out with the patented low line drive punt from Kern allowing for Clemson to start from their own 45. 4 plays, 55 yards, TD. We get the ball back. 16 yard pass to Helm, Golden PI for 15 yards, Blue run for 8 yards. 2nd and 2 and we get our first penalty of the game which basically kills the drive. Ends on the 4th and 2 incomplete pass.

Lose the quarter 7-3.

Saturday Night Live Snl GIF

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, OU Sucks said:

Looks like it:

image.thumb.png.57394bd57d38fa6812828613ebc01c48.png

 

Looks like more stupid fake shit on Twitter.  This goober claims "Chip Brown said this grrrr!" and posts a random screenshot of ESPN.com?

That just looks like a screenshot of his stats to date or something.  It's not even 9 fucking catches!

Nobody predicted Helm would only have 9 catches. 

 

Edited by CurlyDumps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, hookem48 said:

If you're going to play man vs a qb that can run you better not let him loose

I would argue that a long run or two from Klubnick would not be worse than getting gashed on a bunch of intermediate passes wth lots of YAC.  I agree with the post regarding pussy zone D.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, CurlyDumps said:

Looks like more stupid fake shit on Twitter.  This goober claims "Chip Brown said this grrrr!" and posts a random screenshot of ESPN.com?

That just looks like a screenshot of his stats to date or something.  It's not even 9 fucking catches!

Nobody predicted Helm would only have 9 catches. 

 

Must've fooled Helm b/c he seemed to make a direct reference to someone in that press room about a perceived slight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, CurlyDumps said:

Looks like more stupid fake shit on Twitter.  This goober claims "Chip Brown said this grrrr!" and posts a random screenshot of ESPN.com?

That just looks like a screenshot of his stats to date or something.  It's not even 9 fucking catches!

Nobody predicted Helm would only have 9 catches. 

 

Hey Chip, you're up early after your bender

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, cochamps said:

I would argue that a long run or two from Klubnick would not be worse than getting gashed on a bunch of intermediate passes wth lots of YAC.  I agree with the post regarding pussy zone D.

agree completely.  it appears  our D coordinator was afraid VY was walking out there and would run an 80 yard TD against us?  Is that the choice our D coordinator is making?  

 

if our Coordinator is that worried about Cade, how about a spy?  Can you have a spy with man-to-man?  math?  one spy, 4 rushers, that leaves 6 to cover the receivers.  isn't 6 DBs and LBs enough to cover 4 receivers plus a tight end plus a RB?  

I know I must be oversimplifying this.  We still have the best athletes in the country on our D, which is considered the #2 best D in the country and we sit there in this stupid, soft Zone like we don't have athletes who can run with and cover the opposing receivers.  Up front, our 4 DL can beat any 5 OL to pressure the QB on a fairly regular basis, I believe.   

What am I missing? 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are as equipped as just about anyone from a depth perspective to run; however, that’s a risky proposition.  It does make the QBs reads simpler.  And 1 on 1 catches are fairly common.

Our S played downhill pretty aggressively.  With that comes some risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JGrayDBU said:

agree completely.  it appears  our D coordinator was afraid VY was walking out there and would run an 80 yard TD against us?  Is that the choice our D coordinator is making?  

 

if our Coordinator is that worried about Cade, how about a spy?  Can you have a spy with man-to-man?  math?  one spy, 4 rushers, that leaves 6 to cover the receivers.  isn't 6 DBs and LBs enough to cover 4 receivers plus a tight end plus a RB?  

I know I must be oversimplifying this.  We still have the best athletes in the country on our D, which is considered the #2 best D in the country and we sit there in this stupid, soft Zone like we don't have athletes who can run with and cover the opposing receivers.  Up front, our 4 DL can beat any 5 OL to pressure the QB on a fairly regular basis, I believe.   

What am I missing? 

 

Is that you Jerry gray? Looking for a job again? 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cochamps said:

I would argue that a long run or two from Klubnick would not be worse than getting gashed on a bunch of intermediate passes wth lots of YAC.  I agree with the post regarding pussy zone D.

 

51 minutes ago, JGrayDBU said:

agree completely.  it appears  our D coordinator was afraid VY was walking out there and would run an 80 yard TD against us?  Is that the choice our D coordinator is making?  

 

if our Coordinator is that worried about Cade, how about a spy?  Can you have a spy with man-to-man?  math?  one spy, 4 rushers, that leaves 6 to cover the receivers.  isn't 6 DBs and LBs enough to cover 4 receivers plus a tight end plus a RB?  

I know I must be oversimplifying this.  We still have the best athletes in the country on our D, which is considered the #2 best D in the country and we sit there in this stupid, soft Zone like we don't have athletes who can run with and cover the opposing receivers.  Up front, our 4 DL can beat any 5 OL to pressure the QB on a fairly regular basis, I believe.   

What am I missing? 

 

Guys, Clemson abused man coverage the few times we went to it (pick route for Td anyone?). This team plays zone. It plays zone a lot. It usually plays zone really well. We had some busts in coverage that were unusual combined with off games from Taaffee and Malik. Plus, the refs were allowing a lot of physical contact between DBs and receivers so long as it wasn't jersey tugs. Malik didn't respond well to the physical play and push offs. And all of that was made worse by our pass rush disappearing in the second half. But what this wasn't about was our team playing "pussy zone D" (this wasn't soft underneath coverage leading to a bunch of easy throws and YAC) or just needing to play man.  We had one DB get physically beat (Malik). One DB that was just lost in coverage (Guilbeau). And one safety that wasn't his usual reliable self (Taaffee).  It happens. Guys just need to respond and play better next time. I have faith they will. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies if this has already been pointed out but Clemson’s defensive call on the play that basically ended any hopes of a comeback was hilariously bad. I can see why Peter Woods might want to transfer if they are using him as a spy in these situations.

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

Apologies if this has already been pointed out but Clemson’s defensive call on the play that basically ended any hopes of a comeback was hilariously bad. I can see why Peter Woods might want to transfer if they are using him as a spy in these situations.

 

My best guess on the thought process there is that the two spies would also play our screen game, which they probably anticipated us going to on third and long. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

Apologies if this has already been pointed out but Clemson’s defensive call on the play that basically ended any hopes of a comeback was hilariously bad. I can see why Peter Woods might want to transfer if they are using him as a spy in these situations.

 

Catches the ball 2 yards past the line to gain.... "it's gonna be close" 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JGrayDBU said:

agree completely.  it appears  our D coordinator was afraid VY was walking out there and would run an 80 yard TD against us?  Is that the choice our D coordinator is making?  

 

if our Coordinator is that worried about Cade, how about a spy?  Can you have a spy with man-to-man?  math?  one spy, 4 rushers, that leaves 6 to cover the receivers.  isn't 6 DBs and LBs enough to cover 4 receivers plus a tight end plus a RB?  

I know I must be oversimplifying this.  We still have the best athletes in the country on our D, which is considered the #2 best D in the country and we sit there in this stupid, soft Zone like we don't have athletes who can run with and cover the opposing receivers.  Up front, our 4 DL can beat any 5 OL to pressure the QB on a fairly regular basis, I believe.   

What am I missing? 

 

We had a spy on Klubnik on a vast majority of the plays.  Mostly Hill and Lefau.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JGrayDBU said:

Of course dude.  I decided on his name as a handle because of the hit that knocked Bo Jackson out of the 1984 game in Austin and half the season, but more importantly, the best interception in college football history to that point, the int. against Auburn in Auburn in 1983. 

I don't know if we talked about DBU before Gray, but we definitely talked about DBU at some point years later and it was in large part because of Jerry Gray. 

The best factoid ever IMO is that ESPN deleted the 1984 Jerry Gray hit because of Bo's celebrity status?  or famous 4.2 40 combine?

Who knows but it's gone from the ESPN version.  Nobody can accurately describe the play, but I will give it a shot.  Gray is on the opposite side of the field as Bo is running and appears to be headed for a TD.  Gray runs faster than Bo ever has across the field probably at least 70 yards, takes a perfect angle,  and hits Bo so hard it either separated or broke his shoulder. 

 

Great stuff! 

 

 

Here you are, good sir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NorthLoop said:

One of the great things about that Ramonce run vs OSU was that a large chunk of fans had left the stadium by halftime, and yet it was still at top 5 loudest moment at DKR. 

The stadium in the second half that day was awesome. It was a feeding frenzy. D shuts them down, O scores quickly. repeat-  as the crowd just kept getting more and more amped up. From being down 35-7 to finishing 55-35. One of my favorite game memories.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, honolulu horn said:

I think of Ramonce and I think of Butch Hadnot. That guy was unstoppable. 

 

 

Only think that stopped Hadnot was books.

Lance Gunn and Stanley Richard with picks. OG targeted Klingler, no foul back in the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CurlyDumps said:

When I was watching that play live I didn't notice the spies, but I couldn't believe that DB #20 just bailed on covering Blue and gave him all that cushy space to easily convert.

Reminds me of Texas DB play the last decade.  (Minus this year )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 4th and 5 said:

 

Only think that stopped Hadnot was books.

Lance Gunn and Stanley Richard with picks. OG targeted Klingler, no foul back in the day.

Flash forward a year, and we're 5-6 again and Hadnot is trying to transfer to atm. Dark times. 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, 4th and 5 said:

 

Only think that stopped Hadnot was books.

Lance Gunn and Stanley Richard with picks. OG targeted Klingler, no foul back in the day.

Hadnot ran angry.  I was at the Houston game and remember him just carrying dude on his back.  Never got the see Earl play live , but I can't think of anyone since that just initiated contact like Hadnot did.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

 

Guys, Clemson abused man coverage the few times we went to it (pick route for Td anyone?). This team plays zone. It plays zone a lot. It usually plays zone really well. We had some busts in coverage that were unusual combined with off games from Taaffee and Malik. Plus, the refs were allowing a lot of physical contact between DBs and receivers so long as it wasn't jersey tugs. Malik didn't respond well to the physical play and push offs. And all of that was made worse by our pass rush disappearing in the second half. But what this wasn't about was our team playing "pussy zone D" (this wasn't soft underneath coverage leading to a bunch of easy throws and YAC) or just needing to play man.  We had one DB get physically beat (Malik). One DB that was just lost in coverage (Guilbeau). And one safety that wasn't his usual reliable self (Taaffee).  It happens. Guys just need to respond and play better next time. I have faith they will. 

okay, so we did. plenty of things I did not see. However, assuming we go against a better dual-threat QB...Gabriel?....  If we play to this level against them, and they are on top of their game, how many points do we give up?  31?  38?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JGrayDBU said:

okay, so we did. plenty of things I did not see. However, assuming we go against a better dual-threat QB...Gabriel?....  If we play to this level against them, and they are on top of their game, how many points do we give up?  31?  38?  

Yes, that would be bad. But it wasn't bad scheme or bad defensive play calls. I'm not going to assume we have some of the more basic screws ups again. And Malik will have to learn to adjust when refs allow physical play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...