A few observations about my Tigers (and the dawgs) from the game last night: 1) UGAs running backs are legit, 1 thru 4. Gurley when healthy, as we all knew, is the best back in the country hands-down. There is no other back with his combination of size & speed. And the dawgs leaned on him as they should have, and it paid off. And then late, when we couldnt stay on the field offensively (see below), they brought in fresh legs to pound the rock on the ground and open up a big lead. 2) Clemsons D for three quarters was stellar; aside from two chunk plays in the running game by Gurley (the first for a TD), we controlled their running attack and severely constricted their passing attack by forcing quick throws and tackling well in space on the edge. The back end held up very well, which was our primary concern heading in. Lot to work with moving forward here. If the offense gets some things corrected, this D will win a lot of games for us. 3) Clemson needs to find a bell-cow at running back. Howard and Davidson are serviceable as number two backs, but they arent the type of backs to tote the rock 15-25 times a game and sustain an effective (much less explosive) running game through. 4) On a related note, our running game is predicated on the QB being a legitimate running threat. When the defense feels it can concede the QB run without getting torched, the running lanes close quickly and we got bottled up in a hurry. Whether Stoudt is capable of providing that consistent running threat, after last night, is in serious question. 5) With a consistent QB run threat, and therefore a more effective run-game in general, we are much more explosive in the passing game (football 101); whether or not that calls for an injection of untested but talented youth (at QB and RB especially) remains to be seen, but judging from the playcalling in the second half last night, I tend to think the coaching staff feels fairly limited with the capabilities of the veteran personnel at those positions in particular. For Stoudts case especially, I hope Im wrong, and I hope it really was the awful field position (Clemson avg. starting position, own 19; UGAs--own 43) and a confidence in the D that dictated the conservatism. But well see. More aggression early in downs back up, especially one we got down ten (31-21) was a necessity to breaking out of the rut that the coaches didnt seem to have enough confidence to call. 6) Finally, where were the TE, especially Jordan Leggett, in the passing game? With the press coverage on the outside the entire second half, and the aggressive LB blitzes, and the deep zone by the safeties, the TE over the middle should have been an option to relieve the pressure on the running game and the wideouts. It never happened, and thats troubling, given all we heard about a potential breakout year for the position in general and Leggett in particular. Big win for the Dawgs, and Id be surprised, if they stay healthy, if they arent at the top of the SEC East at seasons end. But Clemson isnt as bad as they looked the last 10 minutes either, and are probably closer, projecting over the course of the season, to the team we saw in the first half. But as we knew going in, this team has some pressing questions at some key positions. Some of those questions were answered, I think (the defensive secondary and aside from the couple of early drops, the receiving corps), but most of them on offense remain (O-line depth; QB & RB). How we answer those questions and with whom will define this season. Ok, cathartic public rant over. ;) GO TIGERS!
Posted on: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 18:11:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015