Clemson must be really scared
- Thread starter ULoverUK
- Start date
Sorry man didn't get back to the forum before the game to talk more shit. Not my style to rub it in after the game. I hope you guys kick ass from here on out!
It was an ass whooping I already suspected was more than on its way--TBH, we should've gotten it done at least once the last 3 years when we had closer to the personnel to do so--but we just could NOT do it.
Just the same, people on the Internet who behave as if the accomplishments of a team they follow are their own accomplishments make me laugh. Not that you're one of them.
P.S. AU's offense really does suck see Mercer. Ours has some young talent (e.g. the now-dismantled young WRs) but lacks the OL play that would put us in the league of a Clemson...whether that can ever change remains to be seen as time goes by).
Judging from this game, I'd say the jury is still out on Clemson because they still haven't played anybody "good".
They sure look like they could repeat, but we didn't give them much of a test.
I have to hope they're for real, because then we won't suck as bad as it looks like we do.
They sure look like they could repeat, but we didn't give them much of a test.
I have to hope they're for real, because then we won't suck as bad as it looks like we do.
Judging from this game, I'd say the jury is still out on Clemson because they still haven't played anybody "good".
They sure look like they could repeat, but we didn't give them much of a test.
I have to hope they're for real, because then we won't suck as bad as it looks like we do.
No dude. Step back from the ledge. UofL had a bad game last night vs. a really good team, that's it. My point in the above posts was that I didn't see the skill players around LJ that I saw last year. That turned out to be true. BUT, I came away from the game impressed with the talent level of these guys. They are just young, not unskilled. Your offense is going to get better every week and LJ is still the best player in the country. You are going to boat race most of the teams you face from here on out.
The thing to remember is that Louisville was an independent forever, then C-USA then Big East. They are "new" at this big time football thing. Where like 10 teams - say USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Ohio State, LSU, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, FSU, Oklahoma, Georgia, Miami - get multiple future NFL starters in each recruiting class (whether they actually develop them is another story). Where like 12-14 teams below them - say Washington, Texas A&M, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Auburn, Michigan State, UCLA, Notre Dame, Penn State< West Virginia, Virginia Tech and yes Clemson - are able to regularly compete with the big time powers with good coaching staffs (which again whether they get them is another story). And that doesn't even count programs like Utah and TCU that were even better at the mid-major level than Louisville was (both had undefeated seasons and BCS bowl victories) before they moved up.
Having great skill position play doesn't mean a whole lot. A ton of college teams have great RBs, WRs and QBs, and on defense have great secondaries and DEs. Or they run schemes that make it SEEM as if they have great skill and edge players. And you can do that and dominate mid-major football, including glorified mid-majors like a Big East that no longer had Miami - and also had programs like Pitt and Syracuse that were no longer committed to big time football and proved it by their unwillingness to pay top dollar for coaches and facilities - for quite awhile. But the difference is up front. No, not the OTs and the DEs. That is the NFL game. Great OT play doesn't mean much in the college game as there are few truly excellent dropback passing offenses, and as for DEs, lining up glorified OLBs and tweeners at DE works just fine. In the college game, having very good players at interior OL, DT and LB is what counts. And at DT and LB ... I am not talking about playing oversized DEs at DT, or about playing oversized safeties at OLB which is what a lot of college teams do. It isn't just speed, but you need speed AND size at those positions. You need legit future NFL talent, guys who will start in the NFL, at OG, center, DT and OLB in order to challenge for a national title.
A great example of this happens to be Clemson. They have had good QBs, WRs and other edge players for years, back to the Bowden era even. The difference is that they are just now getting the interior guys. Bryant isn't that much better than Tajh Boyd, Woody Dantzler, Charlie Whitehurst etc., especially Whitehurst who lasted 11 seasons in the NFL. It is just that Clemson is now good enough up front to keep a Jadeveon Clowney from embarrassing them by himself, which was the case just a few years ago.
I dont think hes being unrealistic. I can see losses against FSU, NC state, maybe Wake and maybe even UK. I have no faith in this team unfortunately. In no way, if you have just a "decent" team should a team come in your house, on game day and bi^& smack you around like that . That score is not even indicative of the ass kicking we got and that score is bad.
Lamar is a great kid and a phemoinal athlete...however, he is not a great passer. They are trying to make him something hes not. He may really be here next year and thats good. However, all of that doesn't matter when your defense sucks and your coach wont establish any kind of run game.
Similar threads
