BigRedBuster Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 I'd like to add that in the Clemson ranking my guess is outside of Watson, that their OL's and DL's hit on better recruits and panned out far better then our team. Our fan based always seems to just look at the recruiting ranking rather then how well we are recruiting our lines and developing that talent. Hmmmm.....seems like that's a pretty heavily discussed topic here. Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 As good as Clemson is overall, where are they without their money QB? Maybe top 15? A forgotten team that could have easily dropped a median of 3 games this year and been relegated to some decent-ish bowl? Quote Link to comment
NoLongerN Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 I'd like to add that in the Clemson ranking my guess is outside of Watson, that their OL's and DL's hit on better recruits and panned out far better then our team. Our fan based always seems to just look at the recruiting ranking rather then how well we are recruiting our lines and developing that talent. Hmmmm.....seems like that's a pretty heavily discussed topic here. BigRedBuster, the argument in this thread is that there is hope for us because look at the recruiting rankings for Clemson. Thus, just making the necessary point that a stud QB and good recruiting on the lines are more important then the numbers on the rankings and the development of those players. Yes, talked about in other threads. Not really mentioned after the Clemson recruiting rankibgs post. Just adding in thoughts. Quote Link to comment
Igetbored216 Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 As good as Clemson is overall, where are they without their money QB? Maybe top 15? A forgotten team that could have easily dropped a median of 3 games this year and been relegated to some decent-ish bowl? Soooooo, we're arbitrarily taking away players now? Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Just trying to point out what it is that separates a season like Clemson's playoff run versus a #15ish finish that ends in disappointment and question marks. Quote Link to comment
B.B. Hemingway Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Nice to see that the rest of the world hasn't completely given up on us.... If you just read articles from the local guys you'd think we were destined for eternal mediocrity. Neither opinion makes the other untrue. I suppose not, but a little balance from some of our local journalists would be nice. A few of them (Lee, and Dirk to name two) err on the side of despair when it comes to Nebraska Football. The challenge that Nebraska faces, in their opinions, is insurmountable, and they can't wait to remind us all of that..... Quote Link to comment
Pedro Guerrero Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Since 2011 Clemsons QBs have completed 68% of their passes compared to Nebraskas 57%. They also had over 70 more TDs but only 3 more INTs (I believe it was with over 700 more attempts). If Nebraska QBs completed 10% more of their passes and cutback on the INTs we would have won more games IMO Better QB play = more wins 3 Quote Link to comment
Hoosker Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Since 2011 Clemsons QBs have completed 68% of their passes compared to Nebraskas 57%. They also had over 70 more TDs but only 3 more INTs (I believe it was with over 700 more attempts). If Nebraska QBs completed 10% more of their passes and cutback on the INTs we would have won more games IMO Better QB play = more wins It's true. Many people are quick to point to running the football, which is obviously important in it's own right, but our recent QB play should not be overlooked. I'm interested to see how high the ceiling actually is for Riley's offense in Lincoln. I think now, more than ever, improved completion % and TD/INT ratio should be demanded from whoever starts at QB. Given our recent track record, that shouldn't be asking too much. Quote Link to comment
B.B. Hemingway Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Since 2011 Clemsons QBs have completed 68% of their passes compared to Nebraskas 57%. They also had over 70 more TDs but only 3 more INTs (I believe it was with over 700 more attempts). If Nebraska QBs completed 10% more of their passes and cutback on the INTs we would have won more games IMO Better QB play = more wins 2 Quote Link to comment
junior4949 Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 A poster who doesn't seem to post here any longer has been saying this all season long. I believe he said something along the lines of there being very little difference between the #1-#15 recruiting classes. It seems to me that more than anything it takes one if not a couple special players. Clemson had that in their QB. It's probably why Watson was ranked the #1 QB recruit by ESPN. Clemson won this year by scoring a lot of points. Even in their loss to Pitt, they scored 42 points. It will be very interesting how Clemson does next year after their once in a generation QB is on a NFL sideline and outstanding LB Boulware. I can't disagree with any of what you said. However, I wouldn't use it as an asterisk on the statement that Clemson did in fact win a national championship without going better than 9th in the last seven recruiting classes. I feel like it's a pretty important stat and does actually have some parallels to our situation. Does that really matter if we agree there's very little difference between a #1 and #15 recruiting class? All I'm saying is that for us to become competitive we need to have a top 15 recruiting class probably at least two out of every five recruiting classes. There are times I think people forget just how close we were. If we would have had a Suh back in 01', Solich might still be here today. If we would have had a Crouch in 09', Bo might still be here. People can pi$$ and moan all they want about the past 15 or so years, but to me we've had some pretty good season with some very exciting players to watch. Clemson had two pretty special players with one being on the offense and the other the defense. We've had one or the other at times, but it has been quite a while since we had both. A couple of top 15 recruiting classes every five years which sure help the odds. Quote Link to comment
junior4949 Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Just trying to point out what it is that separates a season like Clemson's playoff run versus a #15ish finish that ends in disappointment and question marks. I'm sure many will disagree, but the same can be said about us during the run. If you take Frazier away, TO probably retires without ever winning a NC. Frazier brought in the needed leadership and swagger that we had been missing all those years. Many will say we win in 95' without Frazier, but it was Frazier's leadership, guts, and never lose mentality from years before that molded that team. It was never about Frazier athletically. It was always his mental toughness. In order to compete with the likes of a Bama, it takes special players. With special players, it really doesn't matter if they're lined up against several #1 recruiting classes of players. The 94' season bowl against Miami proved this along with the shellacking we handed CU the same year with what six or seven first round draft picks. 1 Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Yeah, I really agree with that. Well said. Results dominate narrative and one play can shape not just an entire season, but the stories of coaches' and players' careers. So a lot of the time, I think some of these pretty decent teams that end up with relatively disappointing finishes, they're being way too hard on themselves and wallowing in a pointlessly negative narrative. In reality, it usually takes a bit of magic to put together an outstanding run. I guess I don't know about Saban, Meyer, etc. Seems like those guys have a bit too much magic at their disposal. Quote Link to comment
Saunders Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Clemson recruiting rankings from 2010 to 2016: 28 10 15 15 17 9 11 Looks like they broke that string of teams having a top 5 class before winning the Natty IIRC, the stat is every champ has top 10 class within 4 seasons of winning the title since like 2001. Quote Link to comment
RedSavage Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Since 2011 Clemsons QBs have completed 68% of their passes compared to Nebraskas 57%. They also had over 70 more TDs but only 3 more INTs (I believe it was with over 700 more attempts). If Nebraska QBs completed 10% more of their passes and cutback on the INTs we would have won more games IMO Better QB play = more wins Which is the main reason I think we might actually see a better team next year. For all the times Tommy saved us, there's probably just as many examples, if not more, where he killed drives, momentum and ultimately lost us the game bc he couldn't make a pass that should be relatively easy for most QBs to make. Whether Tanner Lee or POB is the real deal or not, I can not understate how excited I am to see someone able to actually pass the ball with some touch and (hopefully) accuracy. Quote Link to comment
junior4949 Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Since 2011 Clemsons QBs have completed 68% of their passes compared to Nebraskas 57%. They also had over 70 more TDs but only 3 more INTs (I believe it was with over 700 more attempts). If Nebraska QBs completed 10% more of their passes and cutback on the INTs we would have won more games IMO Better QB play = more wins Which is the main reason I think we might actually see a better team next year. For all the times Tommy saved us, there's probably just as many examples, if not more, where he killed drives, momentum and ultimately lost us the game bc he couldn't make a pass that should be relatively easy for most QBs to make. Whether Tanner Lee or POB is the real deal or not, I can not understate how excited I am to see someone able to actually pass the ball with some touch and (hopefully) accuracy. This is an excellent point, and it is also the reason Clemson beat Bama. Clemson had 99 snaps compared to the low 60's for Bama. If a QB and offense can sustain drives, they're in a good position to win. One of the reasons our defense over the years has been bad is because they're just out on the field too many snaps. Martinez was good for killing drives as well. Even the great Bama defense broke after being on the field for 99 snaps. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.