In partnership with CBSSports.com
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
The place for discussion on the NFL
The place for discussion on college baseball
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Shaq Wilson and Reginald Bowens are our starting LBs. Quin Smith is usually the first one of the bench. Jeffery is back-up at WLB, but because Shaq is the leader of our defense and makes most of the calls, that position doesn't rotate as much. Holloman is our starting SPUR which is a hybrid position that has more coverage responsibilities than run support responsibilities.
You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#
Our OL has been average so far but they have improved each game. We have yet to start the same 5 for any game, but that likely will change this week as our coach was a little more positive about our last outing. I am hopeful that our line play will continue to improve as the season goes on, just as they have from the beginning of the season to now.
I see. I've never even heard of Bowens TBH, so I can't comment on him.
The only point I was trying to make was that neither of our LB's are anything to get excited about at this point. Hopefully we start to play Steward more and Anthony continues to get better. I don't know why Quandon still starts.
I am not saying our LBs are hall of famers, but you will be hard-pressed to find a reasonable SC fan who is disappointed in their play, maybe Holloman to begin the year. Shaq has been a good player for us and makes key plays consistently (INT against vandy inside the 10). Bowens and Smith are both big hitters and are good players for us in run support. More than anything, all of these players are fundamentally sound and rarely miss tackles they are supposed to make.
Holloman's numbers are down a little to start the season, but I believe that is because teams wanted to try to spread us out and throw the ball given our perceived weakness in the secondary. Because of the spread, Holloman is out in coverage and being the most experienced secondary player on our team, the ball isn't thrown his way that much.
This is all just my opinion, but given the experience and depth we have at LB, I am not disappointed at all. Next year will be interesting considering that our top 5 are all graduating (Wilson, Bowens, Smith, Jeffery, and Holloman).
I'm not seeing the improvement in the Oline that you are. They gassed pretty early against FSU and Tajh was running for his life. Auburn had pressure on Tajh all day. A good portion of Ellington's yards are based more on poor tackling and his god given ability than on any semblance of holes created by the Oline.
Our pass protection has been decent and run blocking poor, but it's been that way to start the last four seasons and always seems to gel just in time for the latter part of the year. Our defense is significantly better than CU across the board. It's really not even close.
Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.
I just think it's too early. I've seen teams that look bad turn into monsters quickly. Their O line and D line are pretty young but they might be different players towards the end of the season.
And my opinion on the FSU game is they were very competitive with a team that might be the best team in the country.
So, as of right now, I wouldn't expect them to hang with with the top SEC teams. But the question was how they would finish. I think Clemson has some talent and that they might make an impressive run, so I'm not going to write them off yet.
I will acknowledge that there is also a chance that they finish 9-4 and we all post in a thread titled "why does clemson always suck? they're so talented..."
Thanks for your post. I think a lot of time we mistakenly call a team "talented" when they have very good skill position players, which Clemson certainly does. However, were it not for the cupcake ACC schedule that Clemson plays every year we'd see how decidedly untalented the Tigers are at just about every other position. They aren't overly talented as a team. They just look flashy at times with very good skill players. And, Chris, respectfully, FSU is very good, but far from the best team in the country, IMHO.
Your other point regarding how quickly teams can progress during a season is well taken.
South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.
Whether Clemson could beat teams like Georgia, Florida or South Carolina depends on where the game was played. I still think they might have beaten FSU if the game was played in Clemson. It would have been a lot harder for FSU to come back from a 28-14 deficit on the road
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports