Spence and Clawson

#1
Rasputin_Vol

Rasputin_Vol

"Slava Ukraina"
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
71,956
Likes
39,753
#1
Just realized that Spence was also a candidate for the OC here. And he's catching flak from Clemson fans after their effort in their first game against Bama. Clawson has gotten his share of criticism around here. These were 2 of the top guys on Fulmer's list. Does this guy go out and try to find the best people available?

I didn't see much of the Bama game, but did anyone see a difference between Spence's offense and what we saw against UCLA from Clawson? Did Clemson look prepared to play?
 
#2
#2
I was thinking about that shortly after the UCLA game. Doesn't inspire any confidence, does it?

Clemson wasn't executing at all. But I do recall some stubborn playcalling such as trying to run in the middle over and over again for no gain, and Crompton-like quarterbacking.
 
#3
#3
Rasputin_Vol said:
Just realized that Spence was also a candidate for the OC here. And he's catching flak from Clemson fans after their effort in their first game against Bama. Clawson has gotten his share of criticism around here. These were 2 of the top guys on Fulmer's list. Does this guy go out and try to find the best people available?

I didn't see much of the Bama game, but did anyone see a difference between Spence's offense and what we saw against UCLA from Clawson? Did Clemson look prepared to play?
Click to expand...

Both coaches abandoned the run, when it was clearly the strength of their offenses. Clemson found themselves playing from behind, but it wasn't enough to justify Davis only getting a handful of carries in that game.

I'll give Clawson the benefit of the doubt...this was his first live test, under the lights, on the road, with a brand new team to work with.

Spence has veteran playmakers who've been in his system for years...there's no excuse for getting shutout offensively against Bama. But, that's Spence's MO. If you go back and dig up the threads we had about him when he was candidate, there were several of us who pointed to his pattern of poor production in big games. The Bama game was more of the same from him.
 
#5
#5
Rasputin_Vol said:
It just says a lot about the choice of people we choose to fill our coaching staff.
Click to expand...

Maybe. I don't necessarily disagree with you.

I just need to see more from Clawson before I make that conclusion. One thing's for sure - he's certainly not off to a very good start.
 
#6
#6
If Clawson can pull something together starting this week or next, he'll permanently be tainting his time at UT.
 
#7
#7
I'm not impressed with either after their first game.
I think we need an OC/HC type person. Most good OC end up as an HC eventually.
 
#9
#9
We started the season with a new OC and QB. That doesn't work immediately very often. I am not that upset with the offense, because I expected them to struggle. Poor execution in special teams(again!) and passive defensive strategy are what really anger me about that game.
 
#11
#11
Rasputin_Vol said:
It just says a lot about the choice of people we choose to fill our coaching staff.
Click to expand...


Ever since Clawson was named OC and I looked at his resume, I have had a pretty high degee of wonderment over CPF's choice. Here is a guy coming up to Division I Football with virtually no substantial week in and week out hands on experience in the division, especially when it comes to the potent, high caliber competition of those teams fielding 4 and 5 star recruits playing defense every weekend of a season. Couple this seemingly relevant aspect of the choice with the additional fact that he entered what is regarded as the toughest and most competitive conference in the country, and you just have to wonder what did Fulmer know that we didn't know about Clawson? (a-la J. McCain's choice of S. Palin)

True, Clawson had some very potent offenses after scratching his X's and O's as he pondered the types of teams and subsequent talent he was going up against. But, I wondered, and it is a big "BUT," would that truly translate into success when applied to the speed and bone crushing defenses which heavily dot the SEC's and Divison I's map? It surely didn't seem to against UCLA. As hard as I tried to do otherwise, I failed to detect any offensive wizardry at all in that game. In fact, I thought it very much sucked, and at times it even brought back some nauseating memories of the Bill Battle era. (Remember him repeating and repeating how he had to get the ball in Stanley Morgan's hands, and then took him from the WR position and put him at TB?, in line with Clawson's offensive theory of getting the ball in your best players hands?)

Okay, just one more thought and I will have sufficiently vented my frustrations. Remember when the wishbone offense was the rage in the early 70's???? Did you notice that it never blossomed and flourished at the Pro level? Of course it didn't!! Who would want to lose their entire backfield to injury in the first half of a single game?

The question being begged is whether or not Clawson's offensive philosophy, born out of and nurtured in levels of competition so very inferior to where he now finds himself, is that offensive take on his part in any manner similar to the wishbone in the NFL theory posed above? Put another way, are the schemes he used there just mince meat for the level of defensive athletes playing here?

Finally, I do hope I am as dead wrong as dead wrong can be about the guy. As a person I find him most refreshing, a gentleman even.Believe me, I would relish eating a truckload of crow were Clawson to turn out as the gem he was touted to be.
:blush:
 
#12
#12
Jaytrain5 said:
Sort of like the OC we currently have? The one who was a HC prior to coming to UT?
Click to expand...

No someone like Spurrier or Richt who is the OC/HC. Although I don't think Spurrier would be a good choice. But a new HC who will do the OC role.
 
#16
#16
Not impressed with Clawson at all. Can't understand why he stays away from the teams strength of running the ball. I hope he makes the proper adjustments and makes me eat my own words...
 
#17
#17
Jaytrain5 said:
Both coaches abandoned the run, when it was clearly the strength of their offenses. Clemson found themselves playing from behind, but it wasn't enough to justify Davis only getting a handful of carries in that game.

I'll give Clawson the benefit of the doubt...this was his first live test, under the lights, on the road, with a brand new team to work with.

Spence has veteran playmakers who've been in his system for years...there's no excuse for getting shutout offensively against Bama. But, that's Spence's MO. If you go back and dig up the threads we had about him when he was candidate, there were several of us who pointed to his pattern of poor production in big games. The Bama game was more of the same from him.
Click to expand...

how many times did we abandon the run when cutcliff was OC. it makes me wonder who really calls the plays. or if something isn't working, i guess fulmer takes over the play calling
 
#18
#18
Good point. It's been said that Clawson does have total control of the offense though.
 
#19
#19
Clawson
Has a week to get ready for SEC football

He did at least run the ball in the second half of today's game, so maybe he's got potential
 
#20
#20
Spence, Kippy Brown and Clawson are struggling mightily with their offenses this year. The only candidate showing success right now is Marrone...
:unsure:
 
#24
#24
rexvol said:
you cant make that assessment by the on-field product
Click to expand...

The scheme is there. There are guys creating mismatches all over the field. However, when you are handcuffed to poor QB play for 4 games, it doesn't matter if there are 5 guys standing in the endzone un-covered.
 
#25
#25
hard to fault clawson in year one with a new qb....and keep in mind that qb has been awful.

the deal breaker is spence has been with clemson for a while, and has a ton of talent. there's no real reason why they shouldn't be better than they are offensively, at least from a skill posiiton standpoint. the thing clemson fans don't want to hear is that their offensive line is awful. and that more than anything else has led to their offensive demise.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top