Clemson game

[Cockfight]

This game will be driven by emotion on both sides of the ball. The taters have had their ASSES handed to them the last couple years. Our boys will want to continue that tradition! They will be up for this game , HELL... weve owned them, so our boys will just continue on that new tradition of beating a mudhole in their azz and then walking it dry. Fortunately for us, our boys are battle hardened by the SEC schedule and unfortunately for Clemson they will be soft by the lack of competition they have played this year.

This will be a battle at the start. Although, after Clowney and Taylor crush TAJ a couple times and get those two tackles flustered a bit you will see passes being rushed and picks start to develop. All the wide reciever talent wont be a factor with TAJ running for his life from the those two monster DEs. It wont be a problem for our boys to really get up for this game.

Cocks by three TDs +.

[cofcgamecock9]

Bob, just curious on your thoughts on something I was thinking about today..

Clemson really is going to be completely untested for two months coming into the SC game. That is about 8 weeks of practice time, etc.

I am not a psychologist, but I did play one as an undergrad. When a team goes week in and week out being untested, it is human nature that it is going to impact how hard they work at getting better. You can say our team will not do it, but I think it is very difficult for that to be reality. I don't think it impacts performance much when you have really weak opponents for a week or two because the team doesn't lose its overall focus and can re-engage easily when that big game comes up the next week. But with Clemson, this is really becoming a week after week thing for them right now. They just beat Wake, then they went to Duke, now on to Maryland that is playing a LB at QB. Clemson is not getting any competition at all. Hard to improve without competition.

Even a team like Alabama needs those challenging games or it is going to impact their work during the week. Football is a very tough grinding physical sport. When you are playing teams every week that can't even compete until the 2nd quarter, I just think it could start to impact their level of focus each week.

Does this concern you at all?

[Bob the Builder]

Bob, just curious on your thoughts on something I was thinking about today..

Clemson really is going to be completely untested for two months coming into the SC game. That is about 8 weeks of practice time, etc.

I am not a psychologist, but I did play one as an undergrad. When a team goes week in and week out being untested, it is human nature that it is going to impact how hard they work at getting better. You can say our team will not do it, but I think it is very difficult for that to be reality. I don't think it impacts performance much when you have really weak opponents for a week or two because the team doesn't lose its overall focus and can re-engage easily when that big game comes up the next week. But with Clemson, this is really becoming a week after week thing for them right now. They just beat Wake, then they went to Duke, now on to Maryland that is playing a LB at QB. Clemson is not getting any competition at all. Hard to improve without competition.

Even a team like Alabama needs those challenging games or it is going to impact their work during the week. Football is a very tough grinding physical sport. When you are playing teams every week that can't even compete until the 2nd quarter, I just think it could start to impact their level of focus each week.

Does this concern you at all?

If the games were close it would bother me, but they aren't. We were head and shoulders over everyone we played over the past few weeks (apart from GT). I think Morris and Venables are the types of guys that chew players out when they see weakness at practice. Because our schedule has been pretty weak we have not had to deal with injuries that the SEC schools have had. We have a pretty good warm up against a very inconsistent NC State team the week before the SC game. So the basic answer is I have no idea. I think being in the Valley during a nationally televised game night is going to be a massive advantage for the Tigers and we do play really well at home.

[Bob the Builder]

Would you rather be a bit weak psychologically or beat up physically

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by Bob the Builder

If the games were close it would bother me, but they aren't. We were head and shoulders over everyone we played over the past few weeks (apart from GT). I think Morris and Venables are the types of guys that chew players out when they see weakness at practice. Because our schedule has been pretty weak we have not had to deal with injuries that the SEC schools have had. We have a pretty good warm up against a very inconsistent NC State team the week before the SC game. So the basic answer is I have no idea. I think being in the Valley during a nationally televised game night is going to be a massive advantage for the Tigers and we do play really well at home.

But see I think the fact that you are blowing these teams out plays into my point. If one of the games was close, it could serve as a wake up call the coaches could use to get the players focus back. Look, I know this all debatable. Of course you should always want your team to win as convincingly as possible. I am not saying you should hope for a close game.

But take this week for example. I just think it will be very difficult for Clemson to keep focus this week. They just came off of two games where they didn't even have to play starters in the second half. Now they are playing a Md team that has a LB at QB. So lets just say that Clemson does lose a little of its focus this week. It still isn't going to matter in the game and they will win easily. They just aren't playing any competition that can compete with them. Clemson could not practice at all this week and they would still beat MD by 30+ points.

I guess we will find out. I just think it is going to be tough to keep them focused because of how easily they are beating every team they play.

But maybe I am wrong.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by Bob the Builder

Would you rather be a bit weak psychologically or beat up physically

Now that is a good point and something I thought about as well. Clemson's starters are definitely getting a ton of rest. The fact that Andre only had to play one snap on Saturday is a nice luxury.

I am glad we had a bye week this week because we definitely needed it.

[Bob the Builder]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

Now that is a good point and something I thought about as well. Clemson's starters are definitely getting a ton of rest. The fact that Andre only had to play one play on Saturday is a nice luxury.

I am glad we had a bye week this week because we definitely needed it.

You guys are going to be coming into the game playing two weaker opponents as well

[SClawman]

Originally Posted by Bob the Builder

If the games were close it would bother me, but they aren't. We were head and shoulders over everyone we played over the past few weeks (apart from GT). I think Morris and Venables are the types of guys that chew players out when they see weakness at practice. Because our schedule has been pretty weak we have not had to deal with injuries that the SEC schools have had. We have a pretty good warm up against a very inconsistent NC State team the week before the SC game. So the basic answer is I have no idea. I think being in the Valley during a nationally televised game night is going to be a massive advantage for the Tigers and we do play really well at home.

Whipping up on creampuffs probably overinflates your confidence. Playing some hard fought, grind-it-out games every now and then makes you more battle tested. That's why Boyd has looked like a deer in the headlights when he faces tough defenses-at least in the past. He's not used to facing them.

[Bob the Builder]

Originally Posted by SClawman

Whipping up on creampuffs probably overinflates your confidence. Playing some hard fought, grind-it-out games every now and then makes you more battle tested. That's why Boyd has looked like a deer in the headlights when he faces tough defenses-at least in the past. He's not used to facing them.

He looked fine against FSU this year.

[SClawman]

Originally Posted by Bob the Builder

He looked fine against FSU this year.

How good is FSU's defense though? They're facing the same sorry teams you do every week.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by Bob the Builder

You guys are going to be coming into the game playing two weaker opponents as well

Maybe just a difference of opinion, but I don't see Arkansas as the same type of opponent as Duke, Wake Forest, Maryland, etc. A healthy Maryland might have been a different story, but not with the situation they are in now.

You may not see it that way, but that is the way I see it. I agree with you on Wofford, but I don't really think it would start to impact a team until it is a week after week thing like Clemson is going through right now.

But yes, if you consider Arkansas to be the same type of opponent as Clemson is playing right now, then you would have a valid point.

[U-Dub Gamecock]

Arkansas would be comparible with maybe a Miami or NC State in the ACC... but comparing them to Wake or BC is just silly...

[Bob the Builder]

Originally Posted by SClawman

How good is FSU's defense though? They're facing the same sorry teams you do every week.

They have 3 players in the top 50 of CBS's mock draft and have only allowed teams to score more than 20 points against them 4 times over the past 2 seasons.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings

[Bob the Builder]

Maybe just a difference of opinion, but I don't see Arkansas as the same type of opponent as Duke, Wake Forest, Maryland, etc. A healthy Maryland might have been a different story, but not with the situation they are in now.

You may not see it that way, but that is the way I see it. I agree with you on Wofford, but I don't really think it would start to impact a team until it is a week after week thing like Clemson is going through right now.

But yes, if you consider Arkansas to be the same type of opponent as Clemson is playing right now, then you would have a valid point.

Their biggest win this year was over Tulsa

[Legalman72]

No smack...what is Clemson's best win this year? Second best?

[Bob the Builder]

No smack...what is Clemson's best win this year? Second best?

1. VT
2. Duke/WF/GT - Pretty equal
5. Auburn
6. Boston College
7. Ball State
8. Furman

No smack but SC has a great win over UGA and then it drops off a lot after that. Tenn is probably better than VT though. Vandy is probably average/good ACC quality.

[Lonnie]

No matter how you slice it, Clemson's signature win is still Ball State.

It took a 4th quarter comeback for CU to beat an All-barn team that currently sits at 2-7.

[JDRAY^#]

Im not worried about clemson as a team. Clemsons Oline is not very good and has only been tested once this season. They have not faced a Dline like ours. The main thing that concerns me is that it is an away game and we have been night and day when comparing home and away games.

[Cock Kool-Aid]

Originally Posted by Lonnie

No matter how you slice it, Clemson's signature win is still Ball State.

It took a 4th quarter comeback for CU to beat an All-barn team that currently sits at 2-7.

Our first game was equally unimpressive.

[yazoo]

Originally Posted by uscjeremynca

Don't forget that our team was pretty devastated, in shock, and emotional over the Lattimore injury. Don't discount the effect it had on our team in that game.

I heard the players say that they were playing to win for Lattimore. Depends on how you look at it. Latti's injury could have been extra motivation. Losing his play-making definitely hurts our offense.

Originally Posted by Bob the Builder

I don't necessarily think this is true. We are better coached and the defense has gotten a lot better as the season has progressed. However, that D last year had som great players on it. We lost 3 players that were drafted in the first 4 rounds and did not have the guys to replace them. In saying this, I think the SC defense last year was better as well.

I was comparing your defense to the UT defense. We were arguing about whether your D is a lot better, or just marginally better than the Vols. No question you D was better last year. Sensebaugh was a very good cover corner. You don't have anyone nearly as good this year.