Re-watched Clemson game

Author: murph92675 (342 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 3:58 pm on Jan 8, 2019

Even in Blow-outs, most games come down to 4 or 5 plays. On the first TD, Vaughn is in pretty good position - Ross just takes it off him.

On the second TD, it's a 3rd and 14. Its a weird defensive call. It looks like their in man but they don't bring pressure. Gilman strangely comes up, and I have no idea what Tranquil is doing. I'd put that one on Lea - either play 2 safeties in a zone or blitz and play man. It's 3rd and 14.

The third TD, Vaughn makes a nice play - Higgins just makes a better play. The 4th TD, Coney is lined up wrong. There is no one in the "A" gap.

If Love plays, and Tillery doesn't make his stupid penalty - there's a chance its 10 - 3 at half time. If Coney is lined up right - it may have been 10 - 3 late in the game.

They would have needed the fumble to not be over ruled and Book to have not under thrown the deep ball to have had a shot.

If, If, If, if - my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

ND was not that far off in the game, but a few things need to go their way. I think saying they would have won is over stating things - but to say they are not in the same league as Clemson is not quite true also.


This message has been edited 3 time(s).

Replies to: Re-watched Clemson game


Thread Level: 2

Well..maybe I'm not saying this right..cause - I get grief for this kind of talk but..you're right.

Author: Karamello (2553 Posts - Joined: Aug 3, 2007)

Posted at 8:36 pm on Jan 11, 2019

This team is not far off and a lot of those mistakes are coaching and attitude. Guys don't make the better play, they make a play. Your description of Vaughn vs HIggins is exactly that.
And there's a lot of that attitude in SEC and some ACC teams that is not indoctrinated into ND players. At least not this recent edition....Those little things make the difference when getting into that upper echelon.


Thread Level: 2

Re-watched Clemson game

Author: bwnotredame06 (6790 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 1:05 pm on Jan 11, 2019

Did you have it DVR'd or is it available somewhere to watch?

Thread Level: 3

DVR'd it - but YouTube should have it

Author: murph92675 (342 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 2:00 pm on Jan 12, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

You are right, we weren't far off. But that was last year. Bama and Clemson can maintain. Can we?

Author: tky21 (350 Posts - Joined: May 13, 2010)

Posted at 10:29 pm on Jan 10, 2019

That's the question. That's where we want to be. Very tough thing to do...and very few programs are capable of doing it even when operating at maximum efficiency. We are one of them. There are good signs over the last 2 years but time will tell.

Thread Level: 2

You're a total lunatic and I agree with you 100%. Well done.

Author: Jerseymick (3399 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 10:57 am on Jan 10, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

Agree

Author: croaker (441 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:04 pm on Jan 9, 2019

I thought early in the game we were outplaying Clemson. The breaks went the other way with the fumble that wasn't, the fumble that was and a dropped pass or two early on. Not capitalizing on early opportunities certainly changed the complexion of the game and when Love when down, the wheels came off. Having said that, we got beat by a better team and if we played a perfect game and got some breaks, maybe we would have had a chance, but 9 out of 10 times they beat us. We aren't as far off as the score indicated, but Alabama wasn't as far off as indicated either. The difference was they made big plays regularly and we didn't. They looked like a team that was confident it would win and we got flustered in the spotlight (as did Alabama, the coaches at least).

Given the NC game results, I could have seen us rated as high as 2 or 3, but it doesn't really matter because once you get to the playoffs, only finishing 1 matters. A final ranking in the top 10 is a consolation prize for teams that didn't make the playoff, but it should help with recruiting, so I guess that's good.


Thread Level: 2

Big Play Problem

Author: Dinglewood (338 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 5:43 pm on Jan 9, 2019

Many good points. Think these observation synch with them ...

SB Nation had a sabermetric based preview of the "final four." There was one point that the author felt would likely be a dominant determinant re if ND could stay in the game or possibly win: Clemson lived by the big play all season and had never played a game in which they had to string together a series of good "short" gainers.
As it turned out the computer didn't know that Love would be out for a quarter but overall this pretty well explained how Clemson got to 30 (worked well in assessing the championship game as well)

Personally felt going in somehow we need to score about 28ish points and was hoping our ability to create turnover situations was going to have to be excellent as I didn't picture us having long drives (that ideally would keep their O off the field ... fewer plays less chances for big plays).

It is a bit ironic that by comparative scores we achieved "parity" with Alabama - something thought to be an impossible dream.


Thread Level: 2

I agree. And momentum is everything. I believe if the fumble isn't over ruled and we punch one in

Author: IrishBarry (1140 Posts - Joined: Mar 3, 2012)

Posted at 8:13 am on Jan 9, 2019

at that point in the game to take a 10-3 lead, the game goes very differently. I think it would have given the offense some early confidence and allowed them to develop a rhythm that they never seemed to find.

I'm not sure we come out on top, in the end, either way. But I do think it goes late into the 4th quarter before it's decided.

It is staggering if you look at Lawrence's numbers with Love in the game vs when he was out.

Good post.


Thread Level: 2

Nice post.

Author: faircatchcorby (5968 Posts - Joined: Jan 26, 2011)

Posted at 1:39 am on Jan 9, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

Again with aunts having balls and being uncles-doesn't transgender stuff belong on Open Forum.

Author: Rooster (2968 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 11:35 pm on Jan 8, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

"but to say they are not in the same league as Clemson is not quite true also."

Author: Hank the Tank (7127 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:16 pm on Jan 8, 2019

we lost 44-3. Does that like we are in the same league?

We are so far off their games that it's not funny.


Thread Level: 3

ND lost 44 - 3? I thought it was 30 - 3

Author: murph92675 (342 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:22 pm on Jan 8, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 4

He must be an AP voter.

Author: Napoleon (2815 Posts - Joined: Apr 23, 2015)

Posted at 10:34 pm on Jan 8, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

We scored 3 points

Author: holybull101 (5251 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:11 pm on Jan 8, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 3

I agree - ND would not have won. With a few breaks - it would have been competitive

Author: murph92675 (342 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 8:21 pm on Jan 8, 2019

If the fumble goes ND's way, if Book makes a good throw deep, if Love doesn't get hurt...........ND probably scores 13 and loses 20 - 13
Like said in my post - If, if, if...


Thread Level: 2

Re: Re-watched Clemson game

Author: Frankx (65 Posts - Joined: Aug 22, 2017)

Posted at 6:27 pm on Jan 8, 2019

Nice.

Thread Level: 2

Agree.

Author: BaronVonZemo (24266 Posts - Joined: Nov 19, 2010)

Posted at 6:09 pm on Jan 8, 2019

(no message)

Thread Level: 2

Well done.

Author: hipND (3793 Posts - Original UHND Member)

Posted at 5:58 pm on Jan 8, 2019

(no message)