This weeks SI
 

Any one see this weeks "The Mail" section in SI. Titled "One Hit Wonder" someone wrote blasting Clowney. It just got under my skin saying he was almost invisible. What some people that have never played the game don't understand is on some plays they could be double teaming him which frees up somebody else.

Re: This weeks SI
 

I can see him being called a one hit wonder. One hit by Clowney and you will wonder what the heck just happened!

Seriously, they are ignorant if they don't recognize his impact. Obviously, they don't watch ESPN.

Re: This weeks SI
 

Haters gonna hate. Probably a tater or a fan of some other team we have been whooping up on. Just let it go. Let his play on the field do the talking.

Re: This weeks SI
 

Probably a Michigan fan.

Who cares what some asshat fan thinks. JD is the consensus best player in college football and the #1 pick in the draft.

Re: This weeks SI
 

He is from Illinois.

Re: This weeks SI
 

Hmmmm. My brother lives in Illinois and is a big Dawg fan. Was the article signed or have any name(s) attached to it?

Re: This weeks SI
 

I think his stats speak for themselves......and he was only 19 during last season and the Outback bowl. What's going to happen when he grows up.

Re: This weeks SI
 

I guess the Bleacher Report "writers" had to go somewhere.

Re: This weeks SI
 

Found him on Facebook and sent him the message below. He responded this morning (also below) claiming innocence:

"I intended to go back through and review the entire Outback Bowl in order to prove that your Sports Illustrated Letter to the Editor assessment of Jadeveon Clowney's performance was inaccurate. However, when I chose instead to first review your assessment of same solely during Michigan's final series, I knew there was no need for me to waste my time doing so.

You wrote, ' . . . he offered little resistance as the Wolverines marched down the field to score a touchdown . . . '. Well, during that final series, Michigan ran 10 plays, six passes and four running plays. Every pass was either a quick release, three-step drop or was run from the shotgun, none of which left any real opportunity for a sack. However, on one of those six, Clowney read the pass, dropped back off the line of scrimmage, and tackled the receiver for no gain near the Carolina sideline.Of the four running plays, only one was run to Clowney's side. It resulted in a four yard loss in the Michigan backfield by . . . Jadeveon Clowney.

Week-after-week for the past two years, Clowney has been faced with offenses that not only have choose to intentionally avoid him, but that have double, and sometimes triple, teamed him. This coming year will be no different. While he has the inside track on winning the Heisman, he'll be forced to contend with not only this type of "blocking by committee", but also a plethora of disgruntled sports beat writers/Heisman voters from the Big 10 and Big 12 who are tired of watching SEC schools and their players dominate D-1 football. Nevertheless, just as cream rises to the top, so does the performance of those destined for great things. Such is Jadeveon Clowney."


HIS RESPONSE:

"The funny thing about my letter that appeared in Sports Illustrated this week is that very little of it is actually what I wrote. I understand that they may need to edit these things in order to meet available space requirements, but the ' . . . he offered little resistance as the Wolverines marched down the field to score a touchdown . . . ' passage was a total fabrication by them.

I did note that Michigan went right back down the field to score after The Hit, mainly as a vehicle to point out that the play did not provide any type of ³momentum² change, but placed no blame on Clowney for that drive, and certainly didn¹t use the phrase ³He seemed so in awe of himself....² In fact, I used terms like ³eye-popping² and ³there¹s no doubting his physical skills² to describe his abilities and said that he will become a very rich young man when he heads to the NFL.

Bottom line, the letter may have included my main point the 3 tackles in 82 plays (and we can argue until the cows come home about the effects of double- and triple-teaming, formations and whatnot, remembering that all great DEs are schemed for and double- and triple-teamed most of their lives)--but the bulkof it was a total misrepresentation of what I wrote.

Re: This weeks SI
 

WOW! I would be beyond PO if I wrote to a magazine and they changed my letter as much as he is claiming and still put my name on it.

Re: This weeks SI
 

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how wrong they may be. Just ignore it. JD will be the best defensive player in D-1 no matter what SI happens to think.

Re: This weeks SI
 

I can't believe they changed what you wrote. One small change can tilt an article. It was a fantastic college football game. I hope we get a chance to play each other again. It was as good as any bowl game I have attended.
Clowney and Smith got a bunch of publicity from it. That is a good thing. The hit was fantastic and Smith popping up was exciting. I hope he gets a look from the pros. He is small but tough.

Re: This weeks SI
 

Newspapers and magazines edit the letters all the time. It has happened to me, too.

Re: This weeks SI
 

I was shaking my head as I just read this in my SI magazine. I also went to see if I could find the guy on Facebook to see whether he was just another butthurt Michigan fan that was mad this play and the App State upset were the most relevant they've been in over a half decade. I don't count their BCS win because they or shitty VT didn't deserve to be in the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl much less a BCS game. It appeared he was not and that ESPN butchered his comments so I gave him a pass and decided not to email bomb his Facebook inbox with a macro.