|
Replies: 18
| visibility 3640
|
TigerNet Immortal [165025]
TigerPulse: 100%
69
Posts: 68858
Joined: 2013
|
Its worth mentioning again, for those singling out Riley
25
25
Nov 3, 2024, 12:10 AM
|
|
Dabo made sure to let us all know that we don’t run the Riley offense, Riley runs the “Clemson Offense”.
For three successive OC’s now, this is the Clemson Offense:
The same offense that loves WR screens with limited to no downfield blocking, at least 10-15 times a game.
The same offense that consistently throws behind the sticks on third and medium/long.
The same offense that is allergic to attacking the middle of the field.
The same offense that has apparently lost the ability to effectively run a hurry-up set of plays when needed.
The same offense that goes away from whatever is working, seemingly on a whim.
The same offense that rarely takes what the defense is giving it and seemingly bases play calling on throwing darts at the playbook.
The same offense that rarely makes significant adjustments at halftime when struggling.
Again, this is been an identical situation for Elliot, his apprentice Streeter, and a very, very different OC in Riley. This isn’t about Riley, or Elliott, or Streeter, it’s about the common thread in this situation, their boss.
Not since Scott left have the OC’s had the trust and autonomy to make or break a game by calling the game as they generally see fit, and until that changes, we can bring in whatever whiz kid du jour we want for the position and the result will be identical.
|
|
|
|
 |
Ring of Honor [21594]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 13761
Joined: 2005
|
Spot on. No offensive identity whatsoever.
6
6
Nov 3, 2024, 12:12 AM
|
|
And no wrinkles, no window dressing. Nothing. Stale and predictable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [78278]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 29014
Joined: 2018
|
Do you think we are better off without Dabo?
2
Nov 3, 2024, 12:13 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Immortal [165025]
TigerPulse: 100%
69
Posts: 68858
Joined: 2013
|
Delegating Dabo is the best Dabo.
3
Nov 3, 2024, 12:19 AM
|
|
Overly-involved, I’ve never failed at anything so I can make everyone better, coach-mentor Dabo might be great at churning out good men but our ceiling as a program is a lot lower because the individual strengths of the staff are diluted and we are ultimately limited to Dabo’s own X and O coaching level, which I think most honest Clemson fans will admit is not his strength.
So my answer varies by which one you’re talking about. I’m not sure the former Dabo is even making appearances these days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [78278]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 29014
Joined: 2018
|
Asking again.
2
Nov 3, 2024, 12:21 AM
|
|
Do you think we are better off without Dabo, yes or no.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Immortal [165025]
TigerPulse: 100%
69
Posts: 68858
Joined: 2013
|
You should read again, because I answered.
6
6
Nov 3, 2024, 12:29 AM
|
|
If Dabo isn’t able to humble himself to the point where he recognizes that he needs to take a step back and let his hires have more control, and stop enforcing his antiquated system, then what you see right now as the state of Clemson football is pretty much going to be the status quo. I’m perfectly fine with 8-9 win seasons with the occasional dip worse than that and the occasional success higher than that. We sure don’t have to pay a coach $11M a year and then another $10M for a staff to get those results..
I’m ok with this season and last, but don’t pretend Tommy Bowden couldn’t have produced the same results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5516]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Ill answer your dumb question
1
4
Nov 3, 2024, 12:41 AM
[ in reply to Asking again. ] |
|
We wouldn’t have won as much as we did or win as many championships without Dabo. However, football has changed. Thats a fact no one would argue. And Dabo hasn’t changed. Also a fact most would not argue. So, yea. We’re all grateful to Dabo for what he accomplished here. But are there better coaches in the new football era than Dabo? Of course there are. So your question, “are we better off without Dabo,” has two answers. A. We would not have had the success we had when football operations favored Dabo’s style. He was the best and proved it over and over. B. He is not the best coach in the new football environment. So yes, we could find a better coach who knows more about getting the most out of a team in today’s environment than Dabo. 100% yes we could. Who? Pick almost any of them who are currently ranked in the top 5, for a start. I’m sure there are others who could do more with the big Clemson brand in this new od football than Dabo. Yes. Tho I have no crystal ball, my opinion is he is not the guy Moving forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1982]
TigerPulse: 95%
31
|
Re: Ill answer your dumb question
2
Nov 4, 2024, 8:19 AM
|
|
Change is the only constant in the world. Adapt or die.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [926]
TigerPulse: 78%
24
|
Re: Do you think we are better off without Dabo?
3
1
Nov 3, 2024, 12:54 AM
[ in reply to Do you think we are better off without Dabo? ] |
|
I do.
I used to think he was a net positive to the team. He's always been a terrible game-day coach and playcaller. He's not smart enough to be good at the Xs and Os. That's why I've always laughed when people said he could go to the NFL. However, he was an excellent recruiter in the time of amateurism.
That's no longer the case. Selling recruits on Clemson and family doesn't work any more. You're a 5 Star QB. You have Dabo pitching how the team has a great culture, and then you have Kirby Smart offering you $2-3 million. You'd be an idiot to choose Clemson. I know I wouldn't. So Dabo's only recruiting card is ineffective, and recruits know he doesn't like NIL because he's taken such a public stance against it. He now actively hurts out recruiting as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [11061]
TigerPulse: 86%
45
Posts: 14388
Joined: 2004
|
That and..
5
5
Nov 3, 2024, 12:13 AM
|
|
Our talent is still not close to what it was on offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6867]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: Its worth mentioning again, for those singling out Riley
4
Nov 3, 2024, 12:14 AM
|
|
Have to agree with you. I no longer blame Elliott or Streeter. It runs deeper. All the way to the top.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20169]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: Its worth mentioning again, for those singling out Riley
3
Nov 3, 2024, 12:15 AM
|
|
agree, Dabo did say Riley was going to run the 'Clemson offense'. Not sure if the 'developmental' recruits are going to buy the stock Dabo is selling anymore. The defense is even worse under the 'analyst'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [542]
TigerPulse: 84%
19
|
Re: Its worth mentioning again, for those singling out Riley
Nov 3, 2024, 1:17 AM
|
|
💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯 💯💯💯💯💯💯💯 💯💯💯💯💯💯💯 💯💯💯💯💯💯💯
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1645]
TigerPulse: 93%
31
|
You make some good points.
1
Nov 3, 2024, 10:45 AM
|
|
Should Riley be in the booth where he can better see the holes in the defense? Or is he on the sidelines at Dabo's instructions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3450]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: You make some good points.
1
Nov 3, 2024, 10:56 AM
|
|
Should Riley be in the booth where he can better see the holes in the defense? Or is he on the sidelines at Dabo's instructions?
Probably I’ve asked that same question about Goodwin 100x. His entire career as an analyst was from the booth. He was a tremendous asset to BV from up top. What in the world is he contributing from the sideline? On multiple occasions this season it was Eason gathering up the entire defense and chewing them out with Wes standing off to the side staring at his tablet. Enough already! His coaching of LB fundamentals has been less than stellar. We all see it every time they fail at gap integrity. Hire a legit LB coach and send Goodwin back to the booth so he focus on diagnosing what the offense is doing and make actual in-game adjustments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3460]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: You make some good points.
Nov 4, 2024, 8:04 AM
[ in reply to You make some good points. ] |
|
Considering we’ve had a mixture of coordinators in the booth and on the field it seems it’s their choice, not a directive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Day Hero [4547]
TigerPulse: 100%
36
|
Re: Its worth mentioning again, for those singling out Riley
1
Nov 4, 2024, 8:01 AM
|
|
All I could do Saturday was shake my head at the lack of effort, lack of detail, no creativity, very few adjustments, and poor tackling. Never has a games stats been more misleading than Saturday! Did I mention lack of detail, especially in the special teams area once again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8046]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
II Weeks To Prepare; Only To Get What We Saw. Hard 2-argue!
2
Nov 4, 2024, 8:07 AM
|
|
Dabo made sure to let us all know that we don’t run the Riley offense, Riley runs the “Clemson Offense”.
For three successive OC’s now, this is the Clemson Offense:
The same offense that loves WR screens with limited to no downfield blocking, at least 10-15 times a game.
The same offense that consistently throws behind the sticks on third and medium/long.
The same offense that is allergic to attacking the middle of the field.
The same offense that has apparently lost the ability to effectively run a hurry-up set of plays when needed.
The same offense that goes away from whatever is working, seemingly on a whim.
The same offense that rarely takes what the defense is giving it and seemingly bases play calling on throwing darts at the playbook.
The same offense that rarely makes significant adjustments at halftime when struggling.
Again, this is been an identical situation for Elliot, his apprentice Streeter, and a very, very different OC in Riley. This isn’t about Riley, or Elliott, or Streeter, it’s about the common thread in this situation, their boss.
Not since Scott left have the OC’s had the trust and autonomy to make or break a game by calling the game as they generally see fit, and until that changes, we can bring in whatever whiz kid du jour we want for the position and the result will be identical.
Very hard to dispute this!
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7270]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: Its worth mentioning again, for those singling out Riley
1
Nov 4, 2024, 10:49 AM
|
|
Truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 18
| visibility 3640
|
|
|