Clemson finished that game with a 42% post game win expectancy, their only game under 50%, with a 72% offensive percentile performance and 25% defensive performance. Clemson finished with a 36% success rate on offense, which is poor, while giving up a 42% success rate defensively, which is about average.
A&M is the only team Clemson played (excluding Florida State, which is a dumpster fire) that was within 10 spots of them on the team talent rankings on 247, with Clemson at 6th and A&M at 16th (incidentally Notre Dame is 10th). In essence, Clemson played one team that was within their range talent wise that had a good to very good staff, and that game came down to the final seconds.
This isn't to say Clemson is overrated, they are not. A lot has changed for them since that week 2 game, and they have certainly gotten better and more efficient, especially on offense. But, they've also done that against teams that couldn't come close to matching their roster talent, and Notre Dame can come closer than anyone has this season. They also have an excellent staff, and Clark Lea can certainly give Mike Elko a call to pick his brain on how to slow Clemson down. Anyway, I think Clemson should be favored, but these double digit spreads are over the top to me. The teams aren't as mismatched as we're being led to believe.
Both teams struggled to put away mediocre opponents while smacking a a couple of good teams around (2012 Stanford, Oklahoma....2018 Michigan, Syracuse). The 2012 team got exposed in the postseason.
The belief is the 2018 team is better overall. Throw out the Ball State and Vanderbilt games, where Wimbush struggled, and ND looks a lot better. But the tough contest against Pitt and poor halves against Northwestern, Navy, Virginia Tech and USC are cause for worry. Then again, when I looked at Clemson's games, they struggled against teams for a whole half, too.
My head still says Clemson wins this game by double-digits as their D-line will kill our O-line. That will be the difference. But if somehow our O-line figures something out...
In my opinion, the lopsided outcome in that game had more to do with poor preparation (which Kelly has admitted to multiple times) and the disparity in the two staffs. Give me Clark Lea and Chip Long vs. Chuck Martin and Bob Diaco any day. Also, our best player was currently embroiled in a cat fishing scheme at that time, which he was just finding out about. Hopefully that is not the case this season. Which isn't to say Notre Dame wins or anything, but that game was not indicative of that team's quality throughout the year.
I will say that generally speaking, looking at 2012 as a predictor for what will happen this season is misguided. Totally different staffs, different players.
We will not be able to run the ball consistently against their front 4. It will take a game plan emphasizing the pass and a great performance by Book and our D to keep us in this game