Clemson baseball finishes weekend 3-0

Jason Stolz (.222, 0 HR, 2 RBI) went 2-4 with 2 RBI and Jonathan Meyer (0-0, 0.00, 1 SV) finished off Furman with two scoreless innings to gain his first save as the Tigers (3-0) defeated the Paladins (0-3) 8-5 on Sunday.

Mike Freeman, Jeff Schaus and Kyle Parker also had two hits apeice for Clemson.

Pitcher	IP	H	R	ER	SO	BB	Game Score
Brady	3.1	3	2	1	1	0	49

Wide Receivers MIA

Lost in the euphoria of the Miami win is that prior to Jacoby Ford snagging a Kyle Parker laser for the 26 yard game-winning touchdown Saturday is the fact that prior to that catch the wide receivers had a grand total of 4 catches for 52 yards.  It doesn’t take a football savant to understand that the Clemson wide receivers have struggled mightily this year.  With the exception of Ford, bad routes, dropped passes and inconsistent play has dominated the first half of the season for the wide outs.
 
Consequently the offense bogged down for a good portion of the first 5 games, before finally breaking through against Wake two weeks ago
 
The Tigers are young an inexperienced at the position as a whole, but there comes a time when you have to hang on to the ball and make plays.
 
The offense scored 26 on Miami last Saturday (plus 7 on defense and 7 on special teams) and moved the ball effectively against Miami.  How?  Passes to the running backs and tight ends.  These two positions combined for 20 of Kyle Parker’s 25 completions Saturday.  They also accounted for 248 of Parker’s 326 yards passing.

Position	Catches	Thrown to	Yards	Touchdowns
Running Backs	11	13	138	1
Tight Ends	9	10	110	1
Wide Receivers	5	12	78	1
H Backs	0	1	0	0
Interceptions	–	1	–	–
Totals	25	37	326	3

Moreover, the TEs were thrown to 4 times on third down, with three completions for 39 yards and 3 first downs.
 
Going into the Miami game the tight ends had 19 catches for 199 yards and 2 touchdowns.  Against Miami Michael Palmer and Dwayne Allen combined for 9 catches for 110 yards and a touchdown.
 
Beginning on the third offensive series the Tigers used Palmer and Allen in a stretch of  4 of 7 plays that culminated in a 15 yard touchdown pass from Parker to Palmer.  Two of those receptions were on 3rd and 7 and 3rd and 8 and both resulted in first downs to keep the drive alive.
 
I’ve been beating the drum to get Spiller the ball out of the backfield more often and it appears that Billy Napier finally got around to it against Miami as Spiller hauled in 6 passes for 104 yards including a 56 yard touchdown.
 
The table below shows the effectiveness of receptions by position.  It’s clear that for the number of passes caught the tight ends are the most effective group of the bunch and the wide receivers the least effective. 

Position	Catches	Thrown to	Completion%	Yards	First Downs	First Down %	Touchdowns	Touchdown %
WR	52	110	47.3	743	28	53.8	4	7.7
RB	31	47	66.0	329	9	29.0	2	6.5
TE	28	39	71.8	309	21	75.0	3	10.7
FB	6	11	54.5	39	2	18.2	0	0.0
Unknown	–	5	–	–	–	–
Ints	–	7	–	–	–	–
Totals	117	219	53.4	1420	60	51.3	9	7.7

Throws to the tight ends have been completed 71.8% of the time and 75% of those receptions result in a first down.  Throwing to the tight end has been money.
 
Jacoby Ford has 28 of the 52 receptions by the wide receivers.  That means the smorgasbord of Terrance Ashe (9), Marquan Jones (7), Xavier Dye (6), Jaron Brown (1) and Brandon Clear (1) have only 24 catches between them. 
 
It won’t take opposing coaches long to comprehend and game plan for the “new” Clemson offense.  And when that day comes, the real question is can and will the wide receivers get enough separation from the coverage, step up and make plays?  Entering game 8 of the season it’s hard to believe this is still a question mark, but it is.  A huge one at that.

Halftime thoughts

I won’t be posting my post game thoughts until either late tonight or tomorrow because I am headed over to see Texas and Texas Tech play right after the end of the Clemson-BC game.  With that said, here are my impressions of the first half:

1.  Defense is playing lights out.  BC has 1 first down and -6 total net yards.

2.  Let me say this again:  Clemson is killing themselves on third downs.  2/9 so far.

3.  Need TDs not FGs.  You’ve heard that here before, too.  It should be at least 24-0.

4.  Parker struggling, but drops not helping.

5.  C.J. Spiller eats BCs lunch in space.  Not sure why they aren’t throwing the ball to him.

6.  All Michael Palmer does is catch everything thrown near him. 

7.  Richard Jackson has been a pleasant surprise.

Game 2 reflections

After some time to reflect on last night’s 30-27 loss to Georgia Tech here are my thoughts ranging from bad to good.  First, the bad:
 
1.  The right tackle play has to improve if the Tigers hope to contend in the ACC.  Having the tackles switch sides at halftime was a nice coaching move by the Tigers, but the damage was done.

2.  I still don’t understand why the fake FG/pooch punt was called in the first quarter of a 7-0 game.  Dabo himself has said that you need to use “special” plays in the right situation.  It seems to me that Dabo out thunk himself on this one.  Richard Jackson was so busy faking the FG that he didn’t even realize that there was a deep man back for Tech.

3.  Bad coaching/preparation on the Georgia Tech fake FG for a touchdown.  If the players didn’t see the wide receiver lined up outside the formation then the coaches should have and called a timeout.  Period.

4.  The Tigers moved in to Georgia Tech territory on their first two drives and failed to score a point, being stopped on 4th down on one occasion.  Swinney took the hit on that one (saying he made a bad call and the call was “discombobulated”), and these things are the difference in a game like this.

5.  7/19 (36.8%) on third downs.  An improvement, but…

6.  Once again, the defense is unable to hold a 4th quarter lead.  Somewhere in Kansas Vic Koenning is laughing.   Hard.

7.  Special Teams.  5 days after being outstanding the special teams let the Tigers down in a big way.  A lot of the blame belongs to the coaches.
 
 
Now, the good:
 
1.  Kyle Parker gives Clemson a chance to win with his arm and legs.  He’s young, inexperienced and sometimes tries to force the ball, but he will be a star by the end of this year.  Parker is under 50% but has 5 TDs against 2 Ints over the first two games.

2.  C.J. was C.J. averaging 4.4 on 20 carries, 4 catches (one for a 69 yard TD) and accounting for 204 all purpose yards.

3.  Andre Ellington is going to be a very good running back by this time next year.  The coaches already have confidence in him and he has produced in the first two games (93 yards on 12 carries).

4.  Adjustments on both sides of the ball were made at the half last night.  The fact that I have to write that and that it is considered a “big deal” is an indictment of the previous staff.

5.  DeAndre McDaniel.  Wow.  Two games 3 interceptions, plenty of big hits.

6.  Richard Jackson.  A 53 yarder that was 2/3s of the way up the uprights as it sailed through.  5 of 7 on FGs (too many attempts!) through two games and 7 of 7 on XPs.

7.  Dwayne Allen and Michael Palmer: Huge catches from the TE position.

8.  Accountability/Attitude.  Dabo took responsibility for the loss and will hold his players responsible for their mistakes.  Refreshing.  Last year this would have been a 49-7 loss.  The coaching staff and team refused to let that happen.

It looks strange to have more positives than negatives after a loss and especially the first quarter and certainly there is plenty of room for improvement.  I’ve written this before, but a team’s identity, toughness and character aren’t turned around in one offseason.  It’s a process that should involve progress every game/week.  There was progress last night.  The bigger question is will we see progress again next week or will this team revert to past ways.
 
My bet is on Dabo.

Offensive and Defensive Efficiency

The 2008 season was an offensive nightmare for Clemson with the Tigers finishing 87th in total offense, 99th in rushing offense and a middling 60th in scoring offense.  Things will be much better this year right?  After all, the demon that was Cullen Harper is gone and he has been replaced by Kyle Parker, the new crowd favorite after one game against a Sun Belt Conference team.
 
To be fair Parker made few mistakes on Saturday, showed the ability to scramble, and played a solid game.  But then again he wasn’t asked to do a lot.  The Tigers never threw a pass on 1st down in their own territory and ran the ball twice as much as they threw it overall.  In short, it’s clearly obvious the potential is there for Parker to be a very good college quarterback.
 
But let’s not put the cart before the proverbial horse.  By my calculations Parker led 12 drives that accounted for a grand total of 23 points.  Not terrible, but also let’s be realistic – it was Middle Tennessee State.  The game plan was vanilla.  The play calling was vanilla.  That makes it hard to judge after week one, but the point is that it wasn’t as outstanding as some fans believe it was.  Is the potential there?  Absolutely.  But let’s not make too much of an average performance against a team that was 5-7 in the Sun Belt last year.  Time will tell how good MTSU is this year, but for now you have to question the Tigers offensive output.
 
Below, is the formula I have created to measure offensive efficiency (similar to that used in college basketball).  This is a measuring stick tool and not intended to be precise.  What this shows after week one is that Clemson’s offense average 1.64 points per possession.  Very similar to last years “horrific” offense that averaged 1.59 (and that was for a full year including two SEC teams and a Big 12 team, not to mention a top 10 defenses in Boston College).  You can begin to see that the performance against MTSU is obscured a bit by the 14 points on returns and discussion of Willy Korn’s ineptitude.

Offensive Efficiency

Opponent	TD	FG	Punts	Turnovers	Downs	Half	Possessions	Points	OE
MTSU	2	3	3	2	3	1	14	23	1.64

 Certainly the numbers look a little better if you take out Korn’s 2 possessions (1.92), but still not overwhelming.  For comparisons sake let’s see what Texas averaged against a Sun Belt Conference team on Saturday: 4.21. 
 
I don’t expect Clemson to approach Texas’ numbers.  Anything around the 2.3-2.5 range (which would have meant 32-35 offensive points and 45-49 total for Clemson) would be good against a Sun Belt team.
 
On the other hand, maybe 1.64 is good enough if the Clemson defense plays like it did Saturday and the offense avoids turnovers.  The defense gave up 7 points on 15 possessions.  Outstanding.

Defensive Efficiency

Opponent	TD	FG	Punts	Turnovers	Downs	Half	Possessions	Points	DE
MTSU	1	0	7	3	3	1	15	7	0.47

Though the 7 points scored on a turnover count for NCAA statistical purposes, we don’t count them here.  For reference, Clemson’s defensive efficiency number for the 2008 season was 1.46.

I understand the reluctance of some readers to embrace statistics as a useful tool in evaluating performance.  Sometimes statistics don’t show the entire story of what happened in a game.  Willy Korn is 0-1 with an interception because a ball he threw hit his target in the hands, was bobbled and intercepted.  On the other hand, cold, hard, statistics don’t include human biases and selective memory if used correctly.  Personally, I use both statistics and the old “eye ball” test to judge.

Vanilla as vanilla can get

Everybody knows that the Tigers ran a plain, vanilla, basic offense last Saturday.  It was plain to see during the game and in the stats.

But, looking at the play calling one interesting thing jumped out at me:  The Tigers had first downs (either by start of a series or gaining a first down) 30 times in Saturday’s game.  They only passed the ball 4 times and had two other times when a pass was called (Parker was sacked once and of course the Korn fumble happened on 1st down).  So – the Tigers ran 80% of the time on 1st down.

The 80% number is interesting in and of itself, however it doesn’t end there.  Of the 6 passes or passes called 0 (ZERO) of them happened in Tiger territory (one happened at midfield).  The Tigers had 9 first downs in their own territory during the game and called not one single pass.

Young quarterback with zero game experience, second game coming up in five days = conservative play calling.  But not throwing a single pass on any 1st down in your own territory, THAT is conservative.  The real question is how much more are the coaches going to open up Kyle Parker just five days later on the road on a Thursday night?  Has a “good” game against Middle Tennessee completely changed their willingness to have Parker let it fly?

My guess is some, but not a lot, and certainly not as much as I would like.  Certainly something to keep an eye on as the season progresses.

My second point would be that this is another knock against the offensive performance last Saturday night.  21 first downs at midfield or better and you get 23 offensive points out of that?  You could argue that number would be higher except for the two Korn turnovers and I can understand some of that.  That doesn’t change the fact that Clemson had 21 first downs in Middle Tennessee territory and came away with 23 offensive points.  Kyle Parker had at least 5 drives that got into Middle Tennessee territory and ended in a total of 9 points.  There is plenty of blame to go around, and not all of it belongs to the quarterbacks.

3rd down woes continue

I went into some detail earlier in the summer about Clemson’s problems on third down last year and while one game does not a season make, you have to be concerned that the Tigers were 4-14 on third downs Saturday and two of the first downs were on scrambles by Kyle Parker.  Simple math tells me that means the Tigers were 2-12 on third when Parker didn’t run.  Against Middle Tennessee State.  Ouch.

Moreover the Tigers were a less than impressive 1 for 4 on third and 3 or less.  Rendrick Taylor was stopped twice on third and 1 (and once on 4th and one). 

The Tigers settled for 5 FG attempts and couldn’t get the ball in the end zone with a first and goal from the 8.

Year	3rd and 1-3	3rd and 4-6	3rd and 7-10	3rd and 11 or more
2008	60.71%	38.10%	20.69%	8.33%
2009	25.00%	0.00%	50.00%	40.00%

Middle Tennessee is not a pushover, but they are a Sun Belt Conference team and the Tigers will need to improve on these numbers if they are to have any chance to win on Thursday.

Sunday Reflections

Kyle Parker

After a little while to digest what occurred last night, here are some more rational thoughts:

Kyle Parker has a chance to be a really good college quarterback.  His stats don’t show it, but the three (or 4) drops tell part of the story.  Another part was Parker’s ability to scramble for a first down (twice, once on third and 15).  Sure, it was Middle Tennessee, but the ability is there. 

4 for 14 on third downs.  Different year, same story.  I’ll break down the specific plays later, but that number is not good.

Spiller only had 4 carries.  It’s obvious Dabo was holding a lot back for Thursday, including Spiller on the ground and as a receiver.

Ellington and J. Harper looked good in the backfield.  Rendrick?  Not so much.

One pass to the TE (incomplete). Of course this could be one of the secrets that are being held until Thursday.  Was Diehl lined up as a TE on his reception?

5 FG attempts is too many against the likes of MTSU.  That says you can’t move the ball in the red zone.

The WRs were a question mark coming in and they remain that way.  Rationalize the drops any way you want, but those balls need to be caught.

The defense looked solid.  Brandon Maye looked very solid.

Nothing has changed on my feelings re: Richard Jackson.  50/50 at best.  Love the guy.  Pulling for him.  Just cringe when it is FG time.  Yes, the two he missed were 45 and 48 yards, but I just don’t have the confidence at this point.

The OL is pretty much the same.  Take away the 14 special team points and you have 23 points against a Sun Belt Conference team.  Sobering.

What has happened to Willy Korn?

Looking back at those July Early Previews

The reality of fall camp has set in. It’s easy in July to overlook issues that your team may have and play up the positives. Surely the offensive line must be better you say. Surely, one of those wide receivers will jump out and become the go-to guy. No doubt one of those kickers will be the next Chris Gardocki – that always happens at Clemson, right?

Not so much. Less than a month later it’s apparent the offensive line is paper thin and only somewhat improved, the wide receivers are inconsistent and the kickers, well, they aren’t very good at this point.

Add all that up and throw in an inexperienced quarterback and thin defensive line and linebacker corps and there’s no way I can predict a 9-3 season at this point.

On the bright side, the offensive struggles have come with minimal participation from C.J. Spiller and Jacoby Ford, the biggest two weapons on offense. What and who we are seeing (and hearing about) in camp won’t be the same thing we see starting September 5.

Maybe this offensive line gels (and doesn’t get injured). Maybe a receiver or two steps up. Maybe a kicker suddenly finds the middle of the uprights. Maybe Kyle Parker becomes the next Colt McCoy.

Too many maybes.

At this point, I would say realistically Clemson is looking at a 7-5 season. That could change, depending on the maybes above, but sitting here in mid-August that’s a lot to ask.

The defense will be “salty” – that’s Dabo’s word and I believe it. I believe they will be improved over last year, whether it shows up in the stats or not. Also, when you have C.J. Spiller on the field you can literally score on any play.

I look for a lot of 14-10, 17-14 type games and this is where the kicking game will hurt Clemson. The Tigers will be in every game and have a chance to win most of them, but the combination of an inexperienced quarterback, iffy offensive line and weak kicking game doesn’t bode well. Things could change in the next three weeks and I may feel different on September 6th or 11th, who knows. But right now, I don’t see 9-3.

Tuesday scrimmage thoughts

Ramblings from readings on Tuesday’s scrimmage:

1. Rendrick Taylor is hurt.  Stop me if you’ve heard this before.  Rendrick has to be the most star-crossed player in Clemson history.  Year after year, position after position, injury after injury.  Hopefully the pulled hamstring will be better by September 5.
2. I am going to try out for kicker.  That’s how bad it is.  Last week I was thinking Clemson may play a lot of 10-7 or 13-10 type games this year.  On second thought there may be a few 14-7 or 14-10 games.  I’m fairly confident on extra points.  Not so much on field goals.
3. Kyle Parker was 3/10 passing.  Before you start clamoring for Willy Korn, Dabo said there were 4 dropped passes, without telling us who the thrower was.  So, maybe he was good enough to be 7-10, who knows.  He did run 29 yards for a touchdown, which I believe is more yardage than Cullen Harper racked up in two years.
4. Several players will rotate wearing #17 to honor Stanley Hunter who had to give up football last month.  Middle Linebacker Brandon Maye will wear the number in the Middle Tennessee game and Willy Korn (Hunter’s high school teammate) will wear it for the Georgia Tech game.
5. Jamie Harper had a 56 yard touchdown run to cap a 91 yard rushing day.

No practice on Wednesday, back at it Thursday.