Clemson Game Report Card

[AUsince72 11,084]

52 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

What I'm wondering is, statistically, is this the worst offensive performance we've seen from Auburn since we've been grading the team?

Maybe the Tony Franklin experiment aka the 2008 season?  ...but I honestly don't remember the MSU or Vandy games even being as bad as this.  

That Coach Nallsminger looks like a pretty decent offensive mind next to what we witnessed Saturday night.

I don't know if it's the worst (statistically) but it's certainly the weirdest offensive game I've ever heard of...

[gr82b4au 5,568]

On 9/4/2016 at 1:17 PM, EagleFlight34 said:

If we had not seen what Gus is actually capable of in regards to offensive game planning and situational play calling, what we are witnessing would not be quite so bad.

BUT....it appears the man has done nothing but regress. You can look at these very threads that Stat posts after every game and see the negative trend. Gus has refused to make changes that need to be made or to adapt to the current team he has. I honestly believe Cam and Nick broke Gus. He had success with that particular offense, and promptly forgot everything else he ever knew.

That, or he is a double agent plant brought in to destroy us from the inside out.

War Eagle, Anyway!

I have been saying the same thing!!!!!!! His refusal to go back to the AU offense of 2008, or the Tulsa offense... it is like 2010 and 2013 worked so well that Gus just snapped. He will not conform to the QB's strengths anymore. It just seems he is now stuck with this "running offense" and will run it no matter who is at QB. Bizarre. 

[SumterAubie 3,031]

This may be a silver lining, well, maybe a tarnished silver lining, but 224 yards in one half is not bad. We did not get much return on the scoreboard for that amount of yardage but still, after such a poor first half...

[80Tiger 899]

On ‎9‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 10:47 AM, gr82b4au said:

I have been saying the same thing!!!!!!! His refusal to go back to the AU offense of 2008, or the Tulsa offense... it is like 2010 and 2013 worked so well that Gus just snapped. He will not conform to the QB's strengths anymore. It just seems he is now stuck with this "running offense" and will run it no matter who is at QB. Bizarre. 

I guess you mean 2009 AU offense. 2008 was Tubbs. But don't understand what you mean stuck with the "running offense". In 2009 we ran the ball 60% of the time. Last Saturday we ran the ball 57% of the time. So we actually ran the ball less % wise this last week than the avg of 2009. In fact since SW threw the majority of the passes I would imagine his percentage of runs plays while he was in the game was even less. While I agree the QB scenario was jacked up last week, and I won't say we played to any one QB strength very well, but a lot of this is just in our execution which was poor; especially the first half.

[norcuron 35]

Great job as always Stat. I'm getting older and I'm getting balder but if this keeps up I will be completely hairless by November.

I kept asking. "where are the RBs and who is the QB?"  Our Defense were working their butts off and still keeping us in striking distance , But as soon as I thought somebody had a hot hand they were subbed out!   Grrrrrrrrr!

Love you Stat.

War Eagle.

[norcuron 35]

On ‎9‎/‎4‎/‎2016 at 8:48 PM, WeagleAU said:

Being new also, I just realized how that worked when I had a post deleted because they felt it did not fit their forum...oh well, everybody's entitled to their opinion, but there seems to be some censorship going on

I have been here for a while. I was brought here from Auburn Eagle - "The merge". And this is a far shot from a democracy my friend  lol. Sometimes Ya gotta tip toe around to the point you want to make. AU football gets me emotional and sometimes frustrated, Hell I have even shed tears in situations. Sometimes you got to back away from the keyboard for a bit or get the Ban-Hammer. I don't always agree but they are just doin their job and keeping things "friendly".

That being said , This is a great place for info and historians that know AU football like nobody else. #1 Example: Stat.^

[norcuron 35]

On ‎9‎/‎4‎/‎2016 at 6:07 PM, EagleFlight34 said:

I'm still on the double agent paid to destroy AU football from the inside out theory. Now, we just need to figure out who is behind it!

Saban. "Duh"!

[lionheartkc 6,150]

On 9/4/2016 at 8:48 PM, WeagleAU said:

Being new also, I just realized how that worked when I had a post deleted because they felt it did not fit their forum...oh well, everybody's entitled to their opinion, but there seems to be some censorship going on

You'll find that, more often than not, it's not the sentiment of the post that gets removed, it's how it's phrased.This is a family friendly site, but in my experience, the mods are very lenient.  They however do not tolerate trolling (once they catch on it's happening), personal attacks on players, or inappropriate language. Someone also took the time to write up a lovely set of rules that can help you decide whether or not to post something. It's really all to keep this place from devolving into another AL.com.

[AU64 10,122]

@Weagle

Considering some of the stuff that gets posted, its' hard for me to imagine commentary that would get deleted but guess it can happen.    JMO but there is plenty of room to express the full range of emotions on this site without getting dinged.     As Lion noted, give it another try to make you your point.

[WeagleAU 594]

14 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

You'll find that, more often than not, it's not the sentiment of the post that gets removed, it's how it's phrased.This is a family friendly site, but in my experience, the mods are very lenient.  They however do not tolerate trolling (once they catch on it's happening), personal attacks on players, or inappropriate language. Someone also took the time to write up a lovely set of rules that can help you decide whether or not to post something. It's really all to keep this place from devolving into another AL.com.

I can't stand AL.com.  I don't know why any Auburn fan would want to read about Auburn sports on their site.  All they do is try to conjure up negative rumors about Auburn and print them as fact.  AL.com is notorious for posting click bait articles about Auburn football.  They send James Crapea to try to dig up any dirt he can find to try to rip on the program. They are a UAt site that feeds the Bammer trolls.

[norcuron 35]

22 minutes ago, WeagleAU said:

I can't stand AL.com.  I don't know why any Auburn fan would want to read about Auburn sports on their site.  All they do is try to conjure up negative rumors about Auburn and print them as fact.  AL.com is notorious for posting click bait articles about Auburn football.  They send James Crapea to try to dig up any dirt he can find to try to rip on the program. They are a UAt site that feeds the Bammer trolls.

Al.com.... = ALABAMA.com. Don't go there for AU info. Its like watching FOX news or MSNBC and wanting to hear "fair and balanced" political views. Always Bama turds going on about their 86 national titles and the true lord and savior little nicky.

[bigbird 60,368]

[Eagle Eye 7 2,535]

Actually we beat Clemson the second half after our worst first half offense in Gus's tenure. And l keep hearing about the missed Hail Mary's but had we kicked two chip shot field goals that we had in the second half in he red zone or if the refs had not stolen away KJ's catch for a TD we would have one the game anyway. We were probably a lot closer to winning than most give us credit for. And again that was after playing the worst first half offense imaginable . Lot of future for this team. WDE

[auburn4ever 1,266]

Was this true that the ref were from the AAC? if true, no wonder that's part of the season why we lost.

[Tiger 8,817]

I don't understand why people can't see that KJ's overturned catch was actually incomplete. The ball was dragging on the ground for almost a full yard. It might have even wiggled some. Maybe I should re-watch the play, but in the moment after the first or 2nd replay I was convinced it would be called no catch.

[bigbird 60,368]

There wasn't enough to overturn it, IMO. Just like Williams punching the ball out while out of bounds. Not enough to overturn.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

46 minutes ago, Tiger said:

I don't understand why people can't see that KJ's overturned catch was actually incomplete. The ball was dragging on the ground for almost a full yard. It might have even wiggled some. Maybe I should re-watch the play, but in the moment after the first or 2nd replay I was convinced it would be called no catch.

Yea, the ball touched the ground, but I really didn't see anything that definitively said to me that he didn't have control of it while that happened.  It was very obvious that the "tie" went to the team from the same conference as the crew in that case. The call on the field is supposed to get precedent.  In this case it seemed like they went in looking for a reason to overturn.

[Tiger 8,817]

Just now, lionheartkc said:

Yea, the ball touched the ground, but I really didn't see anything that definitively said to me that he didn't have control of it while that happened.  It was very obvious that the "tie" went to the team from the same conference as the crew in that case. The call on the field is supposed to get precedent.  In this case it seemed like they went in looking for a reason to overturn.

I'll just have to watch the play again. I can't really comment too deep on it other than how I felt in the moment. I re-watched the first half of the game but not the 2nd yet.