Our QB play will determine outcome..

[Red Devil]

For vastly different reasons we are in a situation where we are wondering which QB will show up to play, the one against Wofford or the one against UT and Arky. Same way we were with Garcia, but as I said, for different reasons.
Going forward we really have to do some soul searching about QB for next season. We only have Clowney for one more year and we need to press that advantage. Toughest games next year will be UGA and Mizzou on the road. Given Connor's road play this year and his play against Wofford, we have problems in this area.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by henmania

Just curious why the Clempson offense is so much more vaunted this year than last? We shut you guys down really well last year. I'm not seeing any new players out there. So why are you more confidant? Is it the injuries to Shaw and Clowney? I don't think this will be as high a scoring game as you think. I think the players get on the big stage and will make some mistakes. I seriously doubt the Tiggers get 20 in the first half.

You don't have to have new players to be better. Sometimes players improve, sometimes confidence gets better. It does happen.

Last year before SC, Clemson scored 17, 31, and 13 points in their three games leading up to SC. So these games had nothing to do with our great defensive line, etc. These were against ACC opponents (GT, Wake, and NC State). Yet, they didn't even break the 20 point barrier twice.

This year leading into the SC game, Clemson has scored 56, 45, and 62 points leading up to the SC game against ACC opponents.

Sorry man, but that is all I need to see to say that their offense is improved. Clowney, Taylor, etc had nothing to do with them going from 17, 31, and 13 points last year to 56, 45, and 62 points this year.

Same players, but much different results.

I bet you this. If SC had gone the last three games scoring 56, 45, and 62 points we would be saying our offense had improved.

We can beat Clemson, but I have to give them credit where credit is due. Their offense is much improved over last year. We are going to need to score points to win.

[CoverTwo]

I think too many people are putting too much emphasis on our D vs their O. That isn't the story of the game, IMO.

It is the USC offense. Period. It doesn't matter if USC's defense plays strong unless the offense is doing their part. Otherwise, it'll be the USC defense playing tough for 2-3 quarters then wearing down because the offense farted around.

But the biggest difference this year is that Connor Shaw can't run anymore (for the time being of course). He is a sitting duck right now behind an up & down offensive line. He has got to have his most efficient game to date throwing the football.

Take your drop, plant, and throw.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by CoverTwo

I think too many people are putting too much emphasis on our D vs their O. That isn't the story of the game, IMO.

It is the USC offense. Period. It doesn't matter if USC's defense plays strong unless the offense is doing their part. Otherwise, it'll be the USC defense playing tough for 2-3 quarters then wearing down because the offense farted around.

But the biggest difference this year is that Connor Shaw can't run anymore (for the time being of course). He is a sitting duck right now behind an up & down offensive line. He has got to have his most efficient game to date throwing the football.

Take your drop, plant, and throw.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you!!!! This game is about our O vs their D.. Period! Just like you said.

[Boxer]

We need Conner to take charge of the offense.

He has got to keep the tiggers offense on their bench.

He cannot make dumb decisions(throwing across his body for example).

We need that hard nosed, football savvy Conner we all learned to love.

Come'on Conner ....bring your 'A'game.

Our 'D' seems to step up their game when you step up yours.

GO COCKS !!!

[uscbaseball32]

Our D steps their game up when they aren't exhausted because the offense went three and out in about 30 seconds. We have to have long sustaining drives so that our D can catch their breath.

[CU_Tigers4Life]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

The same could be said for Clemson's defense in the second half though. Look, man, I get what you are saying and I am the first to say that Clemson's offense is not a gimmick and it legit. But come on, here, it isn't like you are playing Duke or Wake Forest this weekend. You do realize that SC is a SEC team that has only lost three games in two seasons, right?? They do know how to play "big boy" football (not a reference to ACC or SEC, just saying this is a REAL team unlike Wake Forest, etc).

The reason I say that is because what is to say your defense will not be the one with all of the fatigue in the second half??? Your offensive style isn't exactly beneficial for your defense.

So you tell me what is to say that SC will not to be able to eat 9 minutes off the clock easily in the second half because your defense simply can't stop them?

You do know that it can go both ways, right??

You could very easily be right. In fact I think taking air out of the ball is USC's best strategy. Keep our offense off the field is a major key to victory and you could do that. I don't debate that. But FSU has is number 1 in total defense and they didn't stop us...they just outscored us: (here is where I got my stat from)

http://www.cfbstats.com/2012/leader/...10/sort01.html


Either scenario is very very possible

[CoverTwo]

Someone mentioned in another thread, the Stanford/Oregon game.

Although they had 3 turnovers, Stanford DOMINATED the T.O.P and got an efficient game out of their QB and Stefan Taylor who ran for a bunch of yards.

USC will have to follow suite.

[CU_Tigers4Life]

Originally Posted by henmania

Just curious why the Clempson offense is so much more vaunted this year than last? We shut you guys down really well last year. I'm not seeing any new players out there. So why are you more confidant? Is it the injuries to Shaw and Clowney? I don't think this will be as high a scoring game as you think. I think the players get on the big stage and will make some mistakes. I seriously doubt the Tiggers get 20 in the first half.

Well...we are more mature, Deandre Hopkins has really come on strong to compliment Sammy Watkins, Andre Ellington is healthy and play fantastic and most of all Tajh is 20 pounds lighter and making much smarter plays than his sophomore year. We are also protecting the ball much better.

Will that be enough? Don't know but there is evidence to suggest that we should give a much better showing

[cofcgamecock9]

While I don't want to lose this game at all, I guess at the end of the day I am saying that I really don't want to lose it because our offense looked like crap and couldn't sustain drives against Clemson's crappy ass defense. I think that would send all of us through the roof. There is no excuse for us not to have a good offensive game against Clemson. Even if that means bringing DT in the game, there is just no reason for us to look like deer in headlights against Clemson's defense.

If we lose because, like C2 says, we struggle on offense and can't get anything going and look like we did against Wofford, it will not leave a good taste in anyone's mouth for the future.

On the other hand, IF (not saying it will happen) we lost because we score 35 points and they score 38 points, at least we know overall that our defense is a good unit and that one game doesn't change that. I will be able to begrudgingly tip my hat to Clemson fans and say "hey, your offense is the real deal and you played great."

But if our offense sputters around against what is an absolutely horrible defense and only scores 24 points or something, it is going to raise some serious questions.

C2, is that similar to how you feel?

[LegalCock]

Yeah and if NCSU can rush for over twice their pathetic like 35 ypg average, we should be able to run the ball and control the clock get a stop or two especially in the redzone, where the spread always struggles and get out with a 14+ point win.

[ATL COCK 31]

Formula to win:
Get pressure on Boyd and run the ball effectively. I agree Connor has to play well, but I don't think he has to do more than be a game manager. For some reason I think this game stays in the 20's and goes back in forth... but who knows

[LegalCock]

Like I said at the beginning of the season, we should be able to zone read our way to 10 wins.

[Flameout12]

Originally Posted by CoverTwo

I know a lot of people disagree, but this game has a Clemson blowout written all over it. Why? Because USC's offense has NO room for error early on. It is an absolute must that they get off to a good start.

Agree.

[FilchCock]

I think we win. But, yet again, in spite of Shaw, not because of him. It makes me sick watching him run this offense. And, by the way, our protection is fine. A quarterback who won't throw the ball, has a poor arm, and has little pocket presence will make every o-line look bad.

[Emery]

Unfortunately, I don't see usc winning this for anything that we actually do. I think we win because even though Boyd has been able to shake it off, he still has flashes of stupidity. He looks the worst when pressured, which we should be able to do, and hopefully have their offense flounder a bit again.

For Clemson's D to actually stop an offense, the other team needs to be playing with 9 players. Connor can act like Connor and we still should be able to score in the 30s.

[cofcgamecock9]

Originally Posted by Emery

For Clemson's D to actually stop an offense, the other team needs to be playing with 9 players. Connor can act like Connor and we still should be able to score in the 30s.

See, I agree on this part and that is why I am saying that IF, for some reason, we flounder on offense and dont score in the high 30s or more, then it is not going to sit well. I will not like it, but I can take us losing if Clemson just outplays out defense and wins 38-35 or something like that.

But if our offense flounders like it has at times and we look like we don't know what we are doing, even against Clemsons defense, then it leaves a lot to be desired from this coaching staff. And everyone knows I am a huge supporter of Spurrier.

But there is simply NO excuse if our offense looks bad against Clemson.

I don't want to hear after the game that we were limited because of Shaws foot, etc. Why? Because Seth Strickland should be able to move the ball on Clemson. So Connors limited mobility will just not be a valid reason. If he can't move it, then surely to god we have someone that can on that defense.

[Emery]

Originally Posted by cofcgamecock9

I don't want to hear after the game that we were limited because of Shaws foot, etc. Why? Because Seth Strickland should be able to move the ball on Clemson. So Connors limited mobility will just not be a valid reason. If he can't move it, then surely to god we have someone that can on that defense.

I'm sure there's going to be some people who hate this but an nonmobile Connor is a subpar quarterback at best. He came on strong at the end of last year, and even though he is effective and had a good showing against UT I have been disappointed.

The only reason I feel pretty good about this game is that Clemson's D is no better than Mizzou, Arkansas, or UT and we managed well.

[dan.man.44]

Our defensive backfield will have their hands full trying to cover Clem's receivers. We cant bite on the pump fake, or its a TD. Pressure on Tahj is a must. No turnovers, dont settle for field goals, control the ball, keep Clem' offense on the bench as long as possible.

[henmania]

Originally Posted by CU_Tigers4Life

Well...we are more mature, Deandre Hopkins has really come on strong to compliment Sammy Watkins, Andre Ellington is healthy and play fantastic and most of all Tajh is 20 pounds lighter and making much smarter plays than his sophomore year. We are also protecting the ball much better.

Will that be enough? Don't know but there is evidence to suggest that we should give a much better showing

Ok. You can score 26 points and that will be a much better showing than last year. And that won't be enough with your D playing our O. Not seeing the confidence coming out the Clempson quarters.