In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 44
Online now 37 Record: 3605 (4/12/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Clear differences in the two conferences. I would think this should be an ACC winter meetings topic.
Better strength and conditioning and preaching physicality as a culture would serve the ACC well. Florida State is the most physical of the ACC teams and yet they aren't on the level of most SEC schools.
It's time for the leaders to lead.
Easier said than done
On Twitter: @Niebuhr247
Elaborate. You aren't getting off that easy.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Cory Fravel 18 months ago
AGREE 1000%....Just taking our guys and the SC guys, the difference in their physical makeup is quite obvious. Looking at their DL then ours, look at their LBs then ours, THEN look at their DBs then look at ours. Clowney is a freak, no doubt, but the DBs specifically are just plain bigger, stronger and faster. They all look like LBs....The transformation of these guys since they have been at SC compared the development of our guys is....well....you get the picture. If we want to play "big boy" football, we better get big boys. The anger these sc dbs play with is another story. They are in it to kill you. Watching that game last night was like watching a field full of Ray Lewis'. And it makes me sick.......
Don't you think the ACC would get more physical if it could?
The SEC being more physical is not anything new. Been going on for decades.
Not sure how you reverse that, other than recruiting better players.
It's development, strength & conditioning.
I think Clemson and FSU have generally recruited on par with some of the SEC teams, certainly South Carolina, who just looks more physical across the board. Talent plays a part in it, but physicality is also a factor of the makeup of the player, and a culture fostered by the head coach on down through his staff. I think it's an ingredient that's been missing at Clemson and Florida State, but it's not the only issue. Virginia Tech for example, isn't coaching any differently than before, as Beamer and his staff have been in place a long time and probably haven't changed anything, but they don't have as many quality players as they've had in the past and the performance isn't the same.
I think if you're going to be an elite program, there has to be a foundation of physical play throughout your team. But you also have to have personnel too, and you need to execute at a high level. I think schemes are a distant third in the equation behind these two elements. With great players and physical play, you can run about anything and win a lot of games.
Jody Whitt | Clemson 247Sports
Ok admit it guys......while you were watching that game last night how many times did you cringe when the RB went to the interior of each line, whether it was sc or lsu. I did a couple of times.......Ask yourself, when was the last time you cringed when a RB from GT went into the interior of the clemson DL. Yeah....exactly Last time I did that was about.....er uh.....1995
True freshman RB at LSU gashing the Carolina interior.
Question is....is LSU's freshman starters better than our starters?
Guys, back in the 1980s, Clemson played a tough, brutal style of football even though the conference competition wasn't lights out. Yeah, Maryland had some tough teams from time-to-time, as did UNC But Clemson never softened because of that fact. Even in the mid-to-late 90s, Clemson was a tough, physical team. They simply lacked firepower at the skill positions and competent offensive coaching with the Moody and Ensminger eras.
1997 marked the beginning of the era of soft Clemson football. And that year was the year Joey Batson took charge. The guy is beyond bad. STOP using conference play to excuse it. Boise St., TCU and other programs have done well despite weaker in-conference competition. It is a mindset that begins at the top and we simply will never have that mindset as long as Batson is in the picture. I promise you that.
Defenses in the SEC are way more physical than the ACC, and it's because of two reasons... money and recruiting. (1) SEC teams know the value of a good strength coach, so they pay more than most ACC schools. In any business, the more talented people are going to work for the employers who pay the most. (2) Most of the players in the SEC come to campus as physical specimens, so some of the preliminary work in the weightroom is already done. Any time an ACC and a SEC team play each other, the SEC team looks huge getting off the buses compared to the ACC. So it comes down to recruiting.
Well said Blue.
Same as always. Great competition breeds success in football. Those powers want a stronger bkball conference than a football conference. Look at the recent editions and you cannot count Notre Dame.
Tell it like it is...great stuff Blue
To Cory, Keith, Jody or anyone else. Do you think Clemson is headed in the right direction recruiting wise? I know what the rankings say, but what's y'alls gut feeling? This year or last couple years it seems like it's getting closer, but it will take another year or two to find out. I'm mainly talking defense by the way.
I see what Jody was saying about being on par with USC, but is that just on the offensive side of the ball?
This post was edited by Tiger_Leeroy 18 months ago
Better on the defensive front.
About the same on the offensive line. Need to improve at both, but particularly on offense
Our OL is going to be just fine going forward. We have prototypical NFL body-type tackles waiting in the wings, we have a guy ready to step in at center where there shouldn't be a whole lot of drop off and the OL as a whole is very young. We are most likely bringing in Tyrone Crowder as well. OL is going to be just fine going forward. Obviously we are about to significantly upgrade the DL as well.
The one major thing holding this program back is not talent, it's strength and conditioning plain and simple. If Dabo could let Batson ride off into the sunset and hire a young, hungry, up to date S & C coach then our program could take the next step.
Fact, I am not an expert on any of the above. Fact, it does not take a genius to see we are not the physical team we were in the 80s and early 90s. I long for the day that we "imposed" our will on our opponents. I also realize that the game has changed. I love our offense, our defense needs improvement. I hope Keith is correct, that defensive help is on the way. Football is a physical sport, the tough and the strong will prevail most Saturdays!
Those guys did not get to USC that size with that attitude.
Meeks and Hall still look like they just stepped foot on campus compared to them.
Bench, clings, and squats don't really get you too far these days.
Leeroy- for me this is not about the "recruiting stars" This about having the proper strength & nutrition system, evaluating the player properly for toughness, developing said player physically.
Toughness is a culture. You don't just get tough by accident. You breed it, slowly and steadily.
The '09 - '11 recruiting classes just haven't produced a ton of defensive talent, and that's the big problem here. Some of the '11 & '12 guys have good potential (Anthony/Crawford/Reader/Watkins/Townsend), but there are still a lot of guys who are question marks.
The '09 class produced only 6 signees, and of this group (Meeks/Goodman/Wright/Christian/Shuey/Shatley) one has moved to offense and the other 5 have never developed beyond average players.
in '10 Clemson signed 13 defensive players, but 4 never made it on the field (Brown/Chaney/McKelvey/Nicolopoulos), and of the other 9, two are currently redshirting (Jenkins/Parker), two basically never play (Thomas/Robinson), and the other 5 (Watson/Peters/Breeland/Barnes/Beasley) all redshirted and haven't played much until this season with the exception of Breeland. Of the total 13 it looks like only Breeland, Jenkins, Watson & Barnes may turn out to be above average players. That's 19 defensive players signed in what should be your upper classes, and you have only a handful of players making a difference at all on the field at this point, and likely beyond.
In '11 Clemson signed 14 defensive players and a great linebacker class, but Steward has been injured and may never be the player we all thought. Townsend can't learn the scheme, and Anthony has just been an average player to this point. No idea what to make of Goodson at this point. Crawford and Williams look like they'll be pretty good linemen, but if you look at some of the other guys in this class you really don't know what you're going to get just yet. This class was also hurt by Colton Walls, who never played and quit, and two other players (Gore/Maybank) switched to offense.
Bottom line, there just aren't enough numbers or difference makers on the defense right now. Obviously it's a long way to go, but Clemson has help on the way should they hold on to who they have committed and supplement with players like Alexander and Adams. Big if's, but this staff has a bunch of good recruiters and a good closer in Dabo.
Also, as I said before, the personnel is a big part of the equation and Clemson is lacking in this department now, but as a whole I think this defense could be better if they played with more aggression, physicality and better technique. Those are qualities that enhance the personnel, and I feel these are lacking to some degree.
This post was edited by JW247 18 months ago
I would start off by letting our ADs know how important Non Conference games are, and when our teams are in those games that the ACC as a conference should play with a chip on their shoulder to beat those other conferences especially the SEC. The Big East isn't having any problems doing it. I would also let them know that each school needs to be adding upgrades to their football department, facilities,coaching, and tying all the ends where changes are needed to be made. Their would be a two month deadline to figure out what changes will be taking place and what kind of estimated time we will be looking at. I would also let them know the goals that my board has in place for each and every school. Theirs tons of changes I would make with bring this conference up, but theirs no need for me to sit up here and type it all.
I am no Batson defender, but I think you are overlooking the fact tht in the 80's we took guys that we wouldn't take today because of academic/character issues.
We recruited big, mean guys. I know some of them personally and bailed a few out of trouble a few times. We couldn't keep that kind of stuff under wraps anymore.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports