Quote Originally Posted by DrStrangelove:
Clemson has some negatives of their own going into this season. Only 46% of their tackles return, along with 27% of their tackles for loss. The most in the ACC. Last year Clemson was able to overcome their losses on defense. But more often than not, unless you're Alabama, you don't get repeats like that. Especially when you have to go on the road in your first game against a very good running team with and most liikely an improved defense. I agree with everybody that Clemson has a great offense and Watson is phenomenal. But he may not see as much of the field as people expect..I think Auburn will have enough success running the ball against the young Clemson D to make this game interesting. I can halfway understand why the majority will like Clemson in this spot after their showing against OU and Bama in the playoff. Just keep in mind that Clemson lost 7 of those starters to the NFL draft. Basically what your betting on with Clemson is they will make another easy transistion like they did last year. But this is a new season, new players, new chemistry. Unless your Bama, who is at the top of recruiting every season, it's hard to keep things rolling on both sides of the ball year after year. Ohio State was a perfect example of that last year.
Good to see you back this season Dr. SL, and I appreciate the thoughtful post.
Before I delve into my response, I will make a general point here - one that I make frequently around this time of year.
Probably the most worthless stat that is peddled in the college football world is returning tackles and other such meaningless returning stats. And when I say that, I exclude returning starters which I believe is a very valid stat through probably the first 3 weeks of the season. The implication of these stats are that if this year's starter had played the previous season, he would not have made any of the tackles that his predecessor made, or at least not as many. That is not only a ridiculous assertion, it is pure conjecture.
I agree with your basic premise that in order for Auburn to remain competitive in this game, their offense needs to dominate time-of-possession (TOP) thereby keeping Watson on the sidelines. This is something that I have preached about on nearly an annual basis when Clemson and South Carolina meet in the Battle of the Palmetto State.
I challenge anyone to look up the game stats during South Carolina's 5-game winning streak over Clemson. I'm challenging you to do it, because I'm too lazy to do so. Nevertheless, during Spurrier's 5-game winning streak over Dabo, look at one stat, and one stat only: TOP. Spurrier's game plan versus Clemson was super simple; play ugly SEC grind-it-out-in-the-trenches, ball control offense, and keep Clemson’s high-flying offense on the sideline. What you will find is that in all five of those games, South Carolina utterly dominated the TOP by an average of something like 38 to 22. Alabama did the same thing to Clemson in the 2008 season opener (just as I predicted they would).
Clemson now has a 2-game winning streak in the South Carolina series, and won the TOP battle in both of those games. And the reason they did so because Dabo recognized that for his team to reach the next level, he would need to be SEC good in the trenches, and recruited accordingly.
It should be noted that Alabama tried to play ball control and assert their dominance in the trenches against Clemson in the national title game, and failed miserably. In fact, I would argue Clemson’s defensive front 7 won the battle at the point of attack.
So that brings us full-circle back to the Clemson/Auburn matchup. If you believe Auburn can successfully execute the Steve Spurrier ball-control game plan against Clemson, which is their only chance to remain competitive, then you should probably take the points. I, however, think there is virtually zero shot that will happen.
For starters, playing a slow, ball control brand of football is completely antithetical to the Gus Malzahn offensive philosophy. Malzahn wants his offense to run fast . . . very fast. At this point, because Auburn's other QB prospects are so inept; it appears that pro-style QB Sean White will win the job by default. Why Malzahn even recruited a pro-style QB, and why a pro-style QB would commit to Malzahn is bizarre to say the least, but here we are. We know from last season that White cannot execute the offense Malzahn wants to run. Basically, Auburn’s offense has zero leadership, has zero experience at running back, and virtually no experience on the outside – not that last season’s wide outs were anything to brag about. Auburn’s offense is basically a rudderless ship at sea, and it’s taking on water.
I have submitted on this forum that Auburn's offense is a complete basket case that is wholly incapable of taking advantage of any shortcomings Clemson's defense may have, and that was before yesterday's scrimmage. In speaking to two observers who were there, after watching how dismal and dysfunctional Auburn's offense was, they are now inclined to agree with my assessment that the offense is bad, and that it will be a very long season for Auburn backers.
I don't have the time or space to address Clemson's offense right now except to say it will be even better than it was last season.
The bottom line is that if you're betting on the ability of Auburn's offense to adopt the Spurrier strategy to shorten the game by dominating TOP, or taking advantage of any of Clemson’s defensive vulnerabilities, I think it’s a very ill-conceived bet. There is pretty much no shot that will happen.
Once again, lay the points!
Gl this season and I'm really looking forward to your posts. Thanks for posting bro win or lose
Hot Forum Topics
