forums

Clemson Post Game Media

LexCane55 said:
Except the big bucks argument goes away when you prove incomptence like you did vs GT.

I thought we didn't give Emory a chance. Now maybe if we open the playbook it's a disaster. Who knows so from that standpoint and the win you can't really argue the game plan.

The end of the 4th quarter was embarrassing. I could understand it a bit more if we needed a touchdown. But we needed 35-40 yards to give us a chance
Click to expand...
We were on the 40 yard line.

All we needed was 30 yards to give our kicker a comfortable FG attempt (about 45 yard FG).

Take a deep shot for 30-40 yards. Run the ball once (call timeout if you need to). Then take another 30-40 yard deep shot.

There was a way to take chances and still virtually remove almost all negative risk.

If they intercept a 40 yard deep ball it's no different than a punt.
 
Advertisement
Yoyo82 said:
We were on the 40 yard line.

All we needed was 30 yards to give our kicker a comfortable FG attempt (about 45 yard FG).

Take a deep shot for 30-40 yards. Run the ball once (call timeout if you need to). Then take another 30-40 yard deep shot.

There was a way to take chances and still virtually remove almost all negative risk.

If they intercept a 40 yard deep ball it's no different than a punt.
Click to expand...
you're completely wrong about the "remove all negative risk" part. also emory was really struggling with time management which is why we burned 30 seconds unnecessarily so there's no way we would have been able to get down there time
 
cway313 said:
-play good defense
-Run the ball
-Emory manage the game and not be the reason we lose

That was not a good Clemson team and Mario obviously told the players don't beat ourselves. It worked it wasn't pretty, but in this circumstance with barely having a QB I'm not going to criticize it.
Click to expand...
It work, but it was not a good game plan. They basically did nothing for 3 qtrs, and reverted to last years offense.
 
Can you imagine the venom this board would be directing at Mario and Dawson if they're aggressive with a TF QB making his 1st start, against one of the best D's in CFB, and he throws a pick or gets strip sacked, and Clumpsun makes one play and kicks a GW FG? In a game where the OL and DL were dominant all night? Just weeks after losing a game for inexplicably not kneeling on it?
 
Agree that winning is the only thing that matters but you need to put yourself in position to win. They had an opportunity at the end of regulation as well as the first OT and they didn’t take either. Tonight was the epitome of stealing one, yes we won but it was in spite of the offense game plan. I can see starting conservative but after not having one play on their side of the field for a full half you would hope they change things up.
 
Advertisement
Yoyo82 said:
We were on the 40 yard line.

All we needed was 30 yards to give our kicker a comfortable FG attempt (about 45 yard FG).

Take a deep shot for 30-40 yards. Run the ball once (call timeout if you need to). Then take another 30-40 yard deep shot.

There was a way to take chances and still virtually remove almost all negative risk.

If they intercept a 40 yard deep ball it's no different than a punt.
Click to expand...
Assuming they don't bring it back after said interception! Assuming no fumble, strip sack!! See how that goes both ways!! Why risk it!!
 
cway313 said:
That last 4th qtr sequence I almost came unglued, but this was by far Marios' best coaching game. He had a plan and executed it. Just don't get any wise ideas about ground and pound.
Click to expand...
Man if this is his best, the bar is not that high. He has to continue to get better in situational periods, use of timeouts, coming out of timeouts, etc.
 
Last edited:
Yoyo82 said:
We were on the 40 yard line.

All we needed was 30 yards to give our kicker a comfortable FG attempt (about 45 yard FG).

Take a deep shot for 30-40 yards. Run the ball once (call timeout if you need to). Then take another 30-40 yard deep shot.

There was a way to take chances and still virtually remove almost all negative risk.

If they intercept a 40 yard deep ball it's no different than a punt.
Click to expand...
This is silly.

If you saw the Clemson defense they were in more traditional defense (i.e., vs an offense that can throw or run). With that being said, Dawson decided to run the ball and maybe we hit a 20 yarder since the box was looser.

Secondly, Emory cannot run a no huddle clearly, and your defense was feeling it big time and that Clemson defense was beat the **** up.

It wasn't a bad decision, but if we had TVD then I would question it.
 
Scorpioncane said:
Assuming they don't bring it back after said interception! Assuming no fumble, strip sack!! See how that goes both ways!! Why risk it!!
Click to expand...
Exactly. Mario was overcompensating for GT knowing he had a freshman qb. D was lights out. He trusted the run game and the defense. It worked.

Did I like it at the time? **** no. But the more I give it thought, he knows his team. You could see it with his timeouts. He has a long way to go as a GameDay coach, but he knows his team and has gotten better. I surprisingly didn't hate his TOs this game even with the annoucer and GameDay thread ridiculing him
 
Advertisement
cway313 said:
That last 4th qtr sequence I almost came unglued, but this was by far Marios' best coaching game. He had a plan and executed it. Just don't get any wise ideas about ground and pound.
Click to expand...
I was losing it saying this is GT all over again. I was infuriated that he was to pull defeat from the jaws of victory again.
 
Back
Top