Clemson=No Respect?
by Johnny5 on May 14, 2008 8:03 PM EDT
Email
PrintLast year Clemson performed above expectations in my mind, shocking midwesterners with a very talented season on both sides of the ball. I knew there be explosion in their offense, but in the passing game? I had no idea Cullen Harper would throw for 27 tds and i think it was six pics? thats some great production. Especially when you have James Davis and C.J. Spiller to take oppurtunities away. The defense was elite and staved off a lot of attacks that presented themselves last season.
Lucky for Clemson they lost very little this offseason, the most notable losses being Barry Richardson OT, 2nd round pick Phillip Merling DE. Almost everyone else returns. The offense will be explosive, they will probably average about 35 points a game and the defense will allow about 14. Not to mention the weak conference they play in, this season at least. Yes the ACC has Miami, FSU, and Virginia Tech, but aside from VT they won't be anything special. Look for Clemson to take the ACC title with ease. An early hurdle with Alabama at home could set them up for some name recognition and attention.
Schedule:
Alabama: W 24-21
The Citadel: W 56-7
NCST: 45-13
SCST: W 56-0
Maryland: W 31-17
at Wake Forest: W 30-27
Georgia Tech: W 20-7
at BC: W 21-7
at FSU: W 21-20
Duke: 38-10
at Virginia: L 17-28
South Carolina: W 34-28
ACC champions
All comments on 'Sunday Morning Quarterback' are the views of the individual commenter and do not necessarily reflect the genius of SMQ, Sports Blog Nation, etc.
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"shocking midwesterners with a very talented season"
Seriously? You act like no one west of Appalachia has ever heard of Clemson, nor that we’re aware that Spiller and Davis were a solid duo. Is it really necessary to try and inflame regional tensions, already strained RE: College Football, with this kind of nonsense?
As for Clemson, I do think they are slightly underrated. I think some of that is due in part to Bowden’s teams failing to deliver in the past. Whether that is a fair criticism or not, I think that hangs over the program to some extent. I certainly think they can (and should) challenge for the ACC title this year, depending on the speed with which GT adopts their new offense and the efficacy of said offense. Obviously VT, UVA, and BC have been at the top of the conference for some time, with Wake Forest rising as well, but none of those teams present an insurmountable opposition to the ascension of Clemson, save perhaps VT. With FSU and Miami continuing to under achieve, there is no reason to think that a Clemson team with this amount of talent should not be a riser.
Then again, Bowden’s teams have inexplicably failed to deliver on expectations in the past. If nothing else, it should be interesting.
by The Iron Colonel on May 15, 2008 12:50 PM EDT reply actions
agreed with the calling out midwest
I really don’t even understand that argument. But I would agree that Clemson does have a rather easy schedule. The lack of VT really helps. The only guesses (and I admit even these seem a bit far flung) are @BC and @FSU. Clemson has been such a disappointment with their continual high recruit rankings but little to show from it. It will take a Vince Young-esque performance from someone at Clemson to get them into the MNC game though. By VY-esque I mean Mack Brown’s lack of BCS appearances despite very highly rated recruits and highly ranked teams. It took VY having a ridiculous two seasons to get him to back-to-back Rose Bowls. If Cullen goes off and has a [semi-]spectacular year a la Matt Ryan, Clemson could have a good shot if they win 11 games. If they end up as a 2 loss team, I don’t think with that schedule they would hold up against any other 2 loss teams though.
by formerlyanonymous on May 15, 2008 3:33 PM EDT reply actions
I don't see Clemson winning 11
It’s not that they don’t have the talent to do it (they do), I believe that the Tigers Achilles Heal is none other than Tommy Bowden. TB has not had a lot of success compared with the talent that he has brought in. Keep in mind, over the past couple of years, Clemson was supposed to compete for the ACC title and started off looking every bit of it. But by midseason the team began to fall off. That said, 11 wins with this schedule isn’t really all that far fetched, especially with 2 AA teams on the schedule.
The reason Cullen Harper has looked good is because of the dynamic RB duo behind him. When defenses have to worry about an explosive back like Spiller then it makes things much easier for the QB.
Clemson should be an interesting team to watch this year. And I think the reason that no one has talked about them is because of their failure to do anything worthwhile in the past. When they win an ACC title and a big bowl game then people will take notice.
Clemson has historically underachieved under Tommy Bowden – big preseason expectations but they haven’t even made it to the ACC championship game.
However as bad as the ACC is going to be this year, I think Clemson really is the team to beat. They probably have the best QB in the conference (although that really isn’t saying much) and with those 2 great tailbacks – I think they are to team to beat in the ACC.
Will they live up to the hype?
We’ll see…
by Jim Harbaugh Scramble on May 16, 2008 1:35 AM EDT reply actions
Definitely Clemson's best shot in a while.
If they don’t make it to the title game at least, the season will probably be a bit of a disappointment. BC is likely to fall off with Ryan, Whitworth, and Callender departing, FSU is still full of question marks, NC State may improve but probably can’t make the leap to contender yet, and Maryland and Wake can probably top out at 7-8 wins apiece and one will likely hit far fewer. 6-2 should be plenty to win either ACC division this season.
I would say it would be a HUGE disappointment...
...the table is set perfectly for them this year. They’ve got an easy schedule, plus the ACC will still be startlingly weak. The problem was, it was weak last year. They laid a big fat egg against Georgia Tech and then blew it at the end against BC. If they truly are underrated heading into ‘08 (and I’m not sure they will be…I’ve seen them ranked in the #10-15 range by some, which is exactly where I think they belong), that’s why. If you fail to come up big too many times, folks will continue to assume that will happen again until it doesn’t.
Underacheivers?
I remember Clemson choking and losing some close battles last season, specifically the home loss to Boston College. I still question their coaching with Tommy Bowden.
Visit SoCal Sports Hub.com.
I pick Clemson to win the ACC Championship
Yes, I’m a fervent VT fan, but the Hokies are rebuilding this year. What I saw in the Spring Game didn’t impress me, and I don’t think they have enough to win the conference. The division, possibly, but not the conference. If I had to guess now, I’d predict Clemson to win the ACCCG over VT.
Clemson has the drive (hasn’t won one since the early ‘90s), the talent, and the schedule to make it happen. I think they’ll unexpectedly lose one or two games to knock themselves out of the national title picture, but I think they’ll win the ACC.
Clemson is overrated..
not underrated. Clemson will have a good team with an easy schedule, but witho an inexperienced and young o-line and without any returning starters at LB Clemson is going to struggle, especially early. They will drop the opener to Alabama and find a way to lose at least 2 games in confernce. I predict an 8-4, 9-3 type season for Clemson.
That wouldn't knock them out of the hunt
I could easily see Clemson losing the Alabama game, throwing one away against a team like Georgia Tech or FSU, then falling to South Carolina at the end of the season. That would give them a 9-3 record heading into the ACCCG.
Virginia Tech, on the other hand, will probably in a similar situation, albeit without the third loss: Tech will probably lose at Nebraska and on the road against an ACC team, but I don’t see a third loss before the ACCCG.
by Alaska Hokie on May 23, 2008 1:36 AM EDT up reply actions
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
