Boy that was fun! The game played out mostly as I anticipated it would but somethings I wasn't sure of happened and others were even better.
Our DE's were MUCH better than I expected, Day/Wilson did deliver on the necessary elements of the game plan and Clemson fully imploded. I never anticipated them caving in like they did, so the margin of victory was about two full scores better than I figured it would be.
What I did expect was
we dominate the LOS on both sides of the ball. I expect both lines to play like the B10CG 2014. the OL, Teague (Who I didn't know wasn't available at the time) and Sermon as I expect a pissed off group with more talent than Clemson has seen all season coming at them downhill.
The Bucks are going to take shots and they should, but I think they will be focused on moving the chains and using the SIZE of our RBs to wear down the Clemson front and keep them off balance. Venables banks on teams getting greedy and thus getting negative plays. Last season we had 4 sacks and 9 TFL and one INT in regulation. A principal story line in the game will be Day keeping his hands out of the cookie jar and picking his moments when Clemson is off balance. We will (and must) cut the negative plays in half.
The swing factor in this game are the Bucks DTs and interior LB play which has been outstanding all season. The Tiger base scheme from the Chad Morris days is inside zone (just like a guy named Urban). If the 1 and 3 technique own the A and B gap and push those OL into the backfield that play is DOA. So by the way is Outside zone and Power. That’s why some fairly competent RBs haven’t done shit this season and that won’t change in this game. Clemson’s OL is the weakest part of their entire roster, and they’ve been covering it up all season.
When the Bucks were on D
I fully expected us to cause massive problems for the base play in their offense. Our DT's are playing like Tim Anderson and Kenny Peterson, only each DT is playing like a combination of both of those dudes.
What I expected was that we'd use a combination of nickel and 4 LB looks, and we did that .....but not until late in the game.
The first drive was disgusting, and what I expect if we stick with our base scheme in the Chip. Simple plays on the edge that put a skill player 1/1 with our weakest players in space made the first drive look easy. The play where they ran a slant with the TE from the boundary and a wheel route behind it put Etienne 1:1 with Tuf... and as you'd expect this play went for about 30 yards. On the next drive they tried to run the base scheme and punted.
We made some adjustments with the DBs to apply more leverage on the screens and swings, but this only worked b/c the pass rush was in Lawrence's face or on his back all night. I never expected Coop and Smith to be as disruptive. With them coming off the edge and Haskell and Tommy up the middle the intermediate to deep balls really weren't available.
We also used aggressive blitzes up the middle and when these were run with Werner and Browning up the middle and off the edge it put even more pressure on the downfield pass.
All this worked pretty much perfectly. We took away their base play and once we started scoring TDs in succession the Clemons O imploded.
With a better scheme (and fewer bullshit penalties and/or non calls) we might have held Clemson to 14 points. We're gonna need both next week.
The first drive was fully anticipated. I was screaming at the TV F**k didn't you guys watch any damn film. Our base D is NO match for Clemson's skill players in space on the edge.
The way we played in the 3rd quarter was a mystery. With the DTs owning the middle, and the DEs coming off the edge so well and a two score lead....why we didn't go to Nickel and play Wade in press coverage I don't have any foggy idea.
If Clemson had it to do over, I think they'd have gone back to the screens and throws to Etienne and quick stuff to attack Tuf. I also think they'd audible to throw at Wade every time he's lined up off.
When the Bucks were on O
The way we performed wasn't a surprise. Frankly, had we stayed with the TE and Justin remained healthy we might have scored at least one more TD, which is kinda nuts since the Clemson D was #1 by advanced stats.
It's now pretty clear that Day was using Indy and NW to work on Justin's game, or if that wasn't' the motivation it's beyond any question that this offensive scheme doesn't function well if he isn't using the TE and horizontal elements of the passing scheme. It's also pretty clear that Day likes the deep ball and will press it, and he needs to be careful that we have fully exploited the underneath routes to ensure the safeties are occupied and LBs can get too aggressive.
Justin's weakness (and really an issue for most CFB QBs) is not coming off his primary read fast enough. He did this GREAT in H1 and was helped by the route combos which had all the reads no longer than 15 yards (no deep), designed primary to the TEs and RBs... and some painful film review from NW.
In H2 we got away from the use of the TE in hot under routes a bit, and Day needs to keep the TE engaged with some easy targets throughout. Or if he wants to use the TE on a deep post like he did when we were pinned, he needs Wilson on a shorter Dig.
Justin played so well it's hard to quibble but I will
On the last full series he stays in his read with Sermon on a wheel (which was a GREAT call) and throws into heavy coverage (I think even Dabo was trying to cover Sermon). Smith-NJ was WIDE WIDE Open about 8 yards in front of him with a clean lane as the check down. The coverage on Sermon was obvious and could have been predicted by a 5 year old. If Justin makes the read and progression, he hits that route we and net the first down and the game is over. Instead we punted and gave Clemson a shot at another score.
Final and Future Thinking
This was a fabulous win for us and a real wake up call for the boys in Orange. You're not gonna win a natty with average to above average line play no matter how good your skill players are.
Bama will be a much stiffer test.
I think we have an advantage on the LOS again, and in particular in the A gaps. BUT it's not nearly as big of a gap.
The much BIGGER issue is that the Bama O scheme and skill players compared to the Clemson O scheme and skill players is like the Empire State building is to the Carew Tower in Cincinnati. Both are nice buildings but one is MUCH bigger.
I'll get into this in another post or two, but the O scheme employed by Sark is based on the fundamentals he learned from Norm Chow (who refined/learned from Lavell Edwards) and the Clemson O is based on the scheme from Chad Morris which he derived from Emory Bellard (think Wishbone). Let's just say the Chow scheme is much harder to defend. This is especially true when the QB has a strong arm and you have a great RB.
FWIW I think Day is still honing HIS scheme. If I were to put a historical reference frame on it, I'd say it ties back to Bill Walsh with more emphasis on the Al Davis component which Walsh had to move away from b/c his QB didn't have a strong enough arm. The interesting thing about this is that the QB (Virgil Carter) who was the back up that forced the evolution Walsh and Paul Brown created known as the west coast O was from BYU and coached by Lavell and Norm.
Our DE's were MUCH better than I expected, Day/Wilson did deliver on the necessary elements of the game plan and Clemson fully imploded. I never anticipated them caving in like they did, so the margin of victory was about two full scores better than I figured it would be.
What I did expect was
we dominate the LOS on both sides of the ball. I expect both lines to play like the B10CG 2014. the OL, Teague (Who I didn't know wasn't available at the time) and Sermon as I expect a pissed off group with more talent than Clemson has seen all season coming at them downhill.
The Bucks are going to take shots and they should, but I think they will be focused on moving the chains and using the SIZE of our RBs to wear down the Clemson front and keep them off balance. Venables banks on teams getting greedy and thus getting negative plays. Last season we had 4 sacks and 9 TFL and one INT in regulation. A principal story line in the game will be Day keeping his hands out of the cookie jar and picking his moments when Clemson is off balance. We will (and must) cut the negative plays in half.
The swing factor in this game are the Bucks DTs and interior LB play which has been outstanding all season. The Tiger base scheme from the Chad Morris days is inside zone (just like a guy named Urban). If the 1 and 3 technique own the A and B gap and push those OL into the backfield that play is DOA. So by the way is Outside zone and Power. That’s why some fairly competent RBs haven’t done shit this season and that won’t change in this game. Clemson’s OL is the weakest part of their entire roster, and they’ve been covering it up all season.
When the Bucks were on D
I fully expected us to cause massive problems for the base play in their offense. Our DT's are playing like Tim Anderson and Kenny Peterson, only each DT is playing like a combination of both of those dudes.
What I expected was that we'd use a combination of nickel and 4 LB looks, and we did that .....but not until late in the game.
The first drive was disgusting, and what I expect if we stick with our base scheme in the Chip. Simple plays on the edge that put a skill player 1/1 with our weakest players in space made the first drive look easy. The play where they ran a slant with the TE from the boundary and a wheel route behind it put Etienne 1:1 with Tuf... and as you'd expect this play went for about 30 yards. On the next drive they tried to run the base scheme and punted.
We made some adjustments with the DBs to apply more leverage on the screens and swings, but this only worked b/c the pass rush was in Lawrence's face or on his back all night. I never expected Coop and Smith to be as disruptive. With them coming off the edge and Haskell and Tommy up the middle the intermediate to deep balls really weren't available.
We also used aggressive blitzes up the middle and when these were run with Werner and Browning up the middle and off the edge it put even more pressure on the downfield pass.
All this worked pretty much perfectly. We took away their base play and once we started scoring TDs in succession the Clemons O imploded.
With a better scheme (and fewer bullshit penalties and/or non calls) we might have held Clemson to 14 points. We're gonna need both next week.
The first drive was fully anticipated. I was screaming at the TV F**k didn't you guys watch any damn film. Our base D is NO match for Clemson's skill players in space on the edge.
The way we played in the 3rd quarter was a mystery. With the DTs owning the middle, and the DEs coming off the edge so well and a two score lead....why we didn't go to Nickel and play Wade in press coverage I don't have any foggy idea.
If Clemson had it to do over, I think they'd have gone back to the screens and throws to Etienne and quick stuff to attack Tuf. I also think they'd audible to throw at Wade every time he's lined up off.
When the Bucks were on O
The way we performed wasn't a surprise. Frankly, had we stayed with the TE and Justin remained healthy we might have scored at least one more TD, which is kinda nuts since the Clemson D was #1 by advanced stats.
It's now pretty clear that Day was using Indy and NW to work on Justin's game, or if that wasn't' the motivation it's beyond any question that this offensive scheme doesn't function well if he isn't using the TE and horizontal elements of the passing scheme. It's also pretty clear that Day likes the deep ball and will press it, and he needs to be careful that we have fully exploited the underneath routes to ensure the safeties are occupied and LBs can get too aggressive.
Justin's weakness (and really an issue for most CFB QBs) is not coming off his primary read fast enough. He did this GREAT in H1 and was helped by the route combos which had all the reads no longer than 15 yards (no deep), designed primary to the TEs and RBs... and some painful film review from NW.
In H2 we got away from the use of the TE in hot under routes a bit, and Day needs to keep the TE engaged with some easy targets throughout. Or if he wants to use the TE on a deep post like he did when we were pinned, he needs Wilson on a shorter Dig.
Justin played so well it's hard to quibble but I will
On the last full series he stays in his read with Sermon on a wheel (which was a GREAT call) and throws into heavy coverage (I think even Dabo was trying to cover Sermon). Smith-NJ was WIDE WIDE Open about 8 yards in front of him with a clean lane as the check down. The coverage on Sermon was obvious and could have been predicted by a 5 year old. If Justin makes the read and progression, he hits that route we and net the first down and the game is over. Instead we punted and gave Clemson a shot at another score.Final and Future Thinking
This was a fabulous win for us and a real wake up call for the boys in Orange. You're not gonna win a natty with average to above average line play no matter how good your skill players are.
Bama will be a much stiffer test.
I think we have an advantage on the LOS again, and in particular in the A gaps. BUT it's not nearly as big of a gap.
The much BIGGER issue is that the Bama O scheme and skill players compared to the Clemson O scheme and skill players is like the Empire State building is to the Carew Tower in Cincinnati. Both are nice buildings but one is MUCH bigger.
I'll get into this in another post or two, but the O scheme employed by Sark is based on the fundamentals he learned from Norm Chow (who refined/learned from Lavell Edwards) and the Clemson O is based on the scheme from Chad Morris which he derived from Emory Bellard (think Wishbone). Let's just say the Chow scheme is much harder to defend. This is especially true when the QB has a strong arm and you have a great RB.
FWIW I think Day is still honing HIS scheme. If I were to put a historical reference frame on it, I'd say it ties back to Bill Walsh with more emphasis on the Al Davis component which Walsh had to move away from b/c his QB didn't have a strong enough arm. The interesting thing about this is that the QB (Virgil Carter) who was the back up that forced the evolution Walsh and Paul Brown created known as the west coast O was from BYU and coached by Lavell and Norm.
