“We won, thank the Lord,” said my cousin Geer after the Wake Forest game.  I will say AMEN! and thereby also break the praying-for-Clemson-football-wins taboo. 

Had we lost to Wake, we would have been 2-4 with a looming road trip to Miami.  Thank the Lord, indeed.

Today I would like to hit several different topics.  I think you’ll find at least one of them very interesting.

The Rumor: I am not going to repeat the Big Rumor surrounding the athletic department, but I’m guessing that most of you readers have already heard it.  I heard it from several different sources Saturday at tailgates.  All I can say is that I have not been able to confirm it.  If there is any truth to it, we will be hearing it from the athletic department in the next few weeks.

Outliers: Best-selling author Malcolm Gladwell argues in his book Outliers that it usually takes 10,000 hours of dedicated practice to be dominant in a complicated task.  He notes that Bill Gates started programming on a mainframe as a kid, and Tiger Woods starting playing golf at age three.

There are 2080 hours in a work year with 40 hour work weeks.

There is a NCAA 20 hour rule concerning practice during the school year, and I’m sure that Rich Rodriguez is the only one to break it.  How many hours do our players put in during the year?  The article I linked says that college football players spend 44.8 hours/week focused on football.  10,000 hours would be accumulated in 4.3 years. 

This could account for Wake Forest’s success with lesser talent.  By redshirting virtually everyone, Jim Grobe gets his starters much closer to the 10,000 hour threshold over the course of five years.

Specifically, I wonder how many hours our young offensive line and receivers have put in over the years.  2500 for a redshirt freshman? 

Has Dabo hit even 3000 hours as a head coach yet?

Has Billy Napier hit 3000 hours as an offensive coordinator?

Can Kyle Parker get to his 10,000 hours quicker by being a film room junkie?

As a 20+ year fan, I know that I have started to see the game more clearly…blocking schemes, defenses, personnel groupings, mismatches, etc.  It’s hard to believe that a quarterback wouldn’t see this as he barrages his mind with game film, 20 hour rule be cursed.  Can working with more game tape hurt?  Ronald Reagan said, “Hard work won’t kill me, but why risk it?”

Concussions: Last night I watched the 11 October broadcast of 60 Minutes on my DVR.  Their report on football head injuries was really scary; they focused on long-term problems that players with concussions experience.  This issue has gotten a lot of coverage recently because of Tim Tebow.

I get knots in my stomach thinking about just one of my four boys playing contact sports.

As someone who has been treated by a neurologist — the middle school bullies were right, because doctors have told me there really is something not right in my head — I know that the area between your ears is priceless real estate.  That’s why it wouldn’t bother me in the least if Scotty Cooper were to miss an extra week with his concussion.  It’s just not worth the risk.

Miami:  There is a chance that I will be going to the Miami game with a couple of friends of mine, ditching our wives and kids at home in Greenville.  Though he was talking about Christmas, not road trips with the guys, I hear Andy Williams’ singing, “It’s the most wonderful time of the year.”

If we play like we did against Wake, then we have a good opportunity to win.  Miami has an athletic offensive line, but Clemson can match that with our front four. 

Kevin Steele will come up with a way to pressure Jacory Harris, and I think that Clemson comes close to matching Miami’s speed.

It all comes down to limiting the turnovers, penalties, and missed assignments, as coaches prattle on about in their weekly press conferences.

As a Super Fan who has racked up more than 10,000 hours watching football, I have one suggestion for our Tigers: block.  It’s 90% of every winning offensive game plan.

Please send fawning emails to sectionHrowJ@gmail.com and visit www.clemsontigernation.com.

Struggles on first down have been a big issue for Clemson this season, and of late the Tigers’ offensive staff has really hammered that home in their explanations for how this offense can start moving the ball with regularity.

Overall, I think it’s valid to compare Clemson’s offensive progress with Miami’s as the season unfolds.

Do the Hurricanes have better talent? Certainly appears so. They’re better at QB, WR and OL. And if Clemson is better at tailback, it ain’t by much because Graig Cooper and Javarris James are quite the tandem.

Dabo Swinney and Billy Napier would love to have some of Miami’s weapons. There’s no doubt about that. I’m guessing Napier would cut off one or two of his fingers for one or two of the Hurricanes’ receivers.

Still, I think it’s interesting to chart the two offenses because they’re both being run by first-year coordinators.

Miami was mediocre-to-bad on offense last season, and the ‘Canes went with a veteran in Mark Whipple. Clemson was mediocre-to-bad on offense last season, and the Tigers went with the inexperienced Swinney-Napier tandem.

So far, Miami’s offense has been a splendid success. And a big reason for that is first-down success.

I sifted through the play-by-play of Miami’s win over Oklahoma and found that the Hurricanes averaged a whopping 7.4 yards per play on first down. Included was 8.3 yards per rush on first down.

It’s a lot easier to call plays when you’re putting up those kinds of numbers. Defensive coordinators are constantly guessing, making Whipple’s play-action game deadly.

Against Maryland, Clemson averaged 4.8 yards on 32 first-down plays. The Tigers ran 16 times for 50 yards on first down for an average of 3.1 yards per carry.

Against TCU, the Tigers averaged 5.48 yards on first down with a clip of 4.18 yards on 16 first-down runs.

On the season, Clemson has rushed 95 times for 440 yards on first down (not counting sacks). That’s an average of 4.63 yards per rush, and Swinney and Napier will certainly take 4 yards on every first down if they could.

A deeper look at the numbers, though, reveals the Tigers’ real problem: too many first-down runs that produce minimal yardage.

On 41 of the 95 first-down runs (43 percent), Clemson has rushed for 2 yards or less. That includes 10 runs of 2 yards or less against Maryland, with five of them coming in the fourth quarter.

The Tigers are averaging 16 first downs per game, a stat that ranks near the bottom of the ACC. Miami is averaging 20 per game, a mediocre average that is probably tied to a turnover margin (minus-3) that ranks 11th in the ACC.

Today’s opponent, Wake Forest, ranks atop the ACC in first downs with 22.1 per game.

It should be pointed out that the Tigers’ passing game isn’t exactly flourishing on first down (or any down). But the offense would be in much better position to sustain drives if the running game weren’t stuffed so much on first down.

They could also help themselves by eliminating the dropped passes and false-start penalties, but that’s another blog for another day.

Should be an interesting game later today against the Deacs.

It is obvious that there are many more problems with this Clemson football team than we first thought.  The same core problems we were concerned about going into the season are still haunting the Tigers.

Let’s refer to the original concepts (elaborated on at clempsonfootball and here at Raycom), then expand these items from there.

Toughness: This is the topic that Swinney has harped on for the past 6-9 months, so we will continue to look at this item.  My metric for toughness is the will to win and the determination that no matter the obstacle, one will overcome and find a way to be the victor at the end of the day.  Before, the opinion was that Clemson was considerably tougher than years past, moving in the right direction, but still had a way to go.  While I think this team is still a little tougher than last season, there is still a lot to want for in this category.

The defense is still coming out and playing pretty well (at least for 3 quarters).  The second quarter effort in the Maryland game was unacceptable.  However, this defense forced many quite a few Maryland punts after 3-5 play drives.  The defense (and the UMd coaching staff) gave Clemson every chance to win last week.  Clemson’s defense has played well late in football games, giving up 3 points to Tech, an early 4th quarter TD to TCU, and nothing in the 4th to UMd (and only a 1 yard touchdown score set up by a punt return in the 3rd).  I have bigger fish to fry than the defensive effort this season, and the defense is surely (while not perfect) good enough to take the Tigers a long way and have stepped up in crucial situations to give this offense opportunities to win football games.  While I don’t know if you can ever be too tough on defense, this unit is good, plays hard, and has really gotten the butt end of the  deal from the CU offense.

Offensively, the Tigers are not tough.  Clemson cannot punch the football in the end zone.  Clemson cannot prove to get tough yards when necessary.  Whether CU has an athlete problem, strategy problem, or experience problem, this offense (other than CJ Spiller) has not shown that “want” and desire this season.

It is tough to pile on a freshman QB.  While I think there are many aspects of Parker’s game that need improvement, his early-career shortcomings derive from inexperience.  After showing poise in the GT game, Parker has not played as well as in his first two contests.  It is tough to put the game in a freshman’s hands repeatedly.  This is not a free-pass for KP, just an honest assessment to this point in his career.

Up front, this offensive line gets no push.  While improved over this time last year, we are not moving bodies and definitely not firing off the ball.  There are repeated missed assignments and the tackle position (other than Hairston, when healthy) has been slow and weekly gets embarrassed.

I am not sure whether the problem at receiver is lack of mental toughness/awareness or poor coaching.  Dropping balls can be attributed to lack of athleticism or poor concentration.  I think the latter is the case.  Poor route running/blocking technique is attributed to laziness or not being corrected (coached) when a rounded off route is run.  Either way, it is Jeff Scott’s (and Swinney as this group’s former position coach) to get these items straightened out.  Overall, and other than Ford, this group has really struggled all season and are not mentally tough enough to make the key plays when the game is on the line.

The running back position has not had much to work with this season.  However, Spiller has run extremely hard and done a fantastic job.  Harper has been tentative running the ball and Ellington looks like a back with tons of talent but has put the football on the ground at times this year.  Bottom line is that Spiller will get the vast majority of the touches, particularly in important situations, which is fine by me.

The tight ends have proven that they can catch the football this season.  So far, both Palmer and Allen have made plays in important situations.  As their role seems inevitable to expand, I will hold off judgment on this group until later.

Coaching decisions appear choppy.  With all the rumors floating around (true or not), it at least appears as though the group is pissed off and definitely wants to win.  The defensive side of the ball has been there before and seems to have what it takes to win close football games (that is what tough coaches do, pull out the tight ones).  Lack of fundamental soundness and repeated poor outings on the offensive side of the ball can be attributed to inexperience and poor effort.  Not being athletic enough is one thing, poor technique and execution is another.  This offensive staff has publicly committed to narrowing down the playbook to get things right.  Tough coaches hammer home important ideas to make sure the core concepts are done correctly EVERY time.  The offensive strategy coming out of the regrouping (off) week will show us what this staff is really like.  If the attitude is as haphazard and keeps allowing fundamental errors with no adjustments, then the opinion will be that this offensive staff lacks the will to win.  For the time being, I will attribute the early season follies to inexperience at many positions, notable the head coach and offensive coordinator and will hold off “coaching toughness” assessments until season’s end.

Quarterback Play: Kyle Parker, after an impressive start to the season, is playing like a freshman.  He has all the physical tools to be a great player, but seems to have some trouble managing a football game.  KP has issues telegraphing many of his passes.  There also appears be having timing issues between him and his receivers.  Kyle looks timid in the pocket and tosses the ball off of his back foot at times.  I would really like to see him rely a little more on his ability to tuck the ball and run in order to simply move the sticks.  On the flip side of this coin, Parker has thrown the ball with good velocity all season, has had quite a few catchable balls dropped, and has been under fire all season from DT’s and linebackers.  Clemson’s OL and WR’s have to eliminate the mistakes and help their QB.

Furthermore, while I do not think that Parker has played poorly enough to be benched, my views on incorporating Will Korn into football games has changed since the season began and more so over the past week or so.  It is more common in college football to shuttle young QB’s in and out of the football game.  Will Korn played well enough against Maryland (IMO) to get some playing time, and was definitely not detrimental to the team’s cause.  It may be advantageous to get Parker to the sidelines for a series a quarter and get a fresh perspective of what is going on real-time in the football game.  Watching film and practicing against a scout team is one thing, getting through your rookie season in a trial-by-fire fashion is another.  Bottom line here is this position is (as advertised) inexperienced and has to mature (whether Korn or Parker is under the helm).  The play from this position is about where I expected it to be before the season, but has appeared to fall a little since the first two games of the year.

Coaching Decisions: This point may need assessment in the same fashion as the QB position.  We will start with the easy side of the football, the defensive side.  Clemson, other than a quarter of brain craps against Maryland and the inability to stop the inside QB rush against TCU/GT has looked good all year.  I like Steele’s more aggressive style.  Bowers and Sapp have been in the backfield a lot this season, and Clemson has forced a lot of 3 to 5 play possessions that ended in punts.  This group has done its part and it is a shame they are stuck with three losses to this point.

Offensively, Clemson has been described as choppy at best.  I don’t know what the dynamic is between Swinney and Napier, but will only say that the two must work together form a strategy that flows throughout the game.  To this point, Clemson’s play selection looks like a grab bag of formations, with no attempt to develop a consistent running game.  Clemson has to create an identity on offense.  I believe that more I formation and Allen/Palmer utilization is the correct strategy.  We do run a lot of “read” plays out of single back formations, and those have had some success with CJ utilizing his cutting ability to get up the field and gain some nice yardage.  Otherwise, I do not like the zero-back/no TE look for several reasons, and would be more than happy not to see these formations for the rest of the season.  The main reason for this is the poor play up front.  Clemson’s OT’s (specifically Lambert and Walker) have a tough time moving their feet to get into good position.  The Tigers need either a double team on the DE or, at minimal, a chip on this defender (in passing situations) to give the tackles a fighting chance.  If you know there is a weakness, do not let your opponent attack that weakness without recourse or adjustment.

Kicking Game: The status of Clemson’s return game has not changed since the season opening kickoff.  Ford/Spiller can score any time the opposition kicks to either.  No complaints here other than asking members of the kick return team to pay attention to “Peter” calls and get out of the way of the football.  The punt team has been acceptable, although it was disappointing to see the Terp return man streaking down the field in the 3rd quarter.  Otherwise, nothing too bad sticks out in my memory.

Richard Jackson has done a better job than I expected coming into the year.  I have been particularly impressed with his leg strength, but disappointed with key misses from short/mid-range this season.

Other Stuff: Wide receiver play has been particularly disappointing this season.  Dropped passes and missed blocks have littered the CU landscape so far.  At this point, I have seen enough inept play here and, like many others out there, would like to see TE’s Palmer and Allen (who have caught the ball well thus far) incorporated more into Clemson’s game plan.  Napier has repeatedly expressed these views in various media outlets, now he needs to put this plan into action.

At this point in the season, I hope the coaches realize that it may be time to ditch the multiple formations and variations and find something that works (and stick to it).  Offensively, it is tough to watch this team and its shortcomings on offense.  We are all also hoping to build more depth up front and keep improving here.  Clemson’s OL is still very delicate, and does not have the depth to absorb any injury up front.  The progression of Dalton Freeman should help some depth issues, as Mason Cloy will get some reps at guard cascading into reps at the tackle position for David Smith.

Somehow or another, this team is not all the way out of the ACC Atlantic division race.  It is ridiculous that this division is so weak, but winning this division is still attainable (possibly by finishing a ridiculous 0.500 in ACC play).  Clemson still has plenty of improvement to do if this team even wants to sniff 7 wins, though.

We will evaluate these metrics again in a future reading.

Q: What does Kyle Parker do if he goes to take a mid-term exam, needs to make an “A”, and feels some pressure?

A: Rolls right and throws 60 yards down field.

Q: Does Kyle Parker know that in football you don’t have to get the steal sign to run?

A: Cheeseburger toast (this answer was contributed by my seven-year old, but I think you get the point of the joke.)

These are both things that I would have long conversations about with Kyle Parker, if I were the offensive coordinator during a bye week, which I’m not – even when it’s not a bye week.  I have written that “helpers” have conjured up 500 ideas for fixing the Clemson offense, and in this blog that number will swell by two or three.  Maybe the Clemson coaching staff will pick up on some of these nuggets of reason, cogency, and insight.  What coach hasn’t dreamed of having a helper monkey on the internet?  Fortunately, I volunteer.

First of all, Billy Napier has said that we need to get Dwayne Allen more involved in the game plan.  I agree.  The area where that falls apart is that he hinted we will have more two tight end sets to get Allen the ball.  I would like to see Allen playing with his hand up like (gulp!) South Carolina does with their tight ends, maybe even using pod formations like (gulp!) South Carolina.  Another factor is that the double tight end set is dangerously close to Rob Spence’s dreaded double-double tight end set, which rarely worked.  I just thought of another joke:

Q: What is Rob Spence’s plan for stopping nuclear proliferation in the Muslim world?

A: Add more tight ends, and then don’t use them to block for the bubble screen.

Like everyone else, I think we need to find an identity, whatever that means.  In fact, I would trade having an identity for a more esoteric measure of offensive productivity: scoring.

I think that we need to increase elements of misdirection in our offense.  Orbit motion secured an ACC Championship for Wake Forest a few years ago.  Former Clemson coordinator Rich Rodriguez has made a career of developing the read option, even if he didn’t invent it himself.  Urban Meyer has very fast partial qualifiers running through the backfield on many plays along with other read misdirection tactics.  Paul Johnson has three options on every play in what he calls his spread offense, a misnomer if there ever were one.  Miami’s Whipple has unbalanced lines and his guards and tackles are always on the run.  Some exceptions of note: Oklahoma and Southern Cal just have sick talent.  An observation of note: Clemson doesn’t have sick talent, just good talent.

I think that teams need to scheme to create confusion on defense.  I believe that this can not be done solely by being multiple on offense, even though Clemson was just outscored by a multiple offense in Maryland.  I believe the best offenses in college football use misdirection as their primary tactic.

Lou Holtz agrees with me.  I heard him say last week that offenses can’t move the ball unless they “fulshkeya”.  After hitting the replay button several times on my DVR, I realized he was saying, “false key you.” I concur, Lou.  Well said.  Unfortunately I don’t think in a bye week we can install an offense to fulshkeya, so we may have to wait until next year for the misdirection.

I’ve saved dropping the bomb for last.  C.J. Spiller needs to be moved to wide receiver.  His most dangerous plays this year have come as receiver and returner, not as running back.  He has run wheel routes and has been the check down receiver, but I think he can do much more.  He ran a beautiful fly route for a touchdown against Georgia Tech.  Having Spiller will take attention off of Jacoby Ford.  Indeed, Spiller is the equal of Ford as a receiver.  Andre Ellington would replace Spiller as starter at running back.  I definitely think we gain more by having Spiller at wide receiver than we lose by having Ellington start at running back.

Most of these ideas have been floating around along with many others, so I don’t claim them as exclusively my own, unless they are implemented and effective, in which case I retroactively claim them as my exclusive intellectual property, even if they started out as someone else’s original idea.  I learned this from a boss I once worked for.  It’s ethical; I promise.

Please send fawning emails to sectionHrowJ@gmail.com and visit www.clemsontigernation.com.

I love focusing on the negative, so I was especially pleased when a friend called this week to explain a nightmare scenario that has tortured me all week.

Clemson is now 2-3 with a 1-2 record in the ACC.  The loss to Georgia Tech came out of the Atlantic Division.  Clemson holds the tiebreaker over Boston College, while Maryland holds the tiebreaker over Clemson.  What if the season were to unfold this way:

Middle Tennessee State (Win)

Georgia Tech (Loss)

Boston College (Win)

TCU (Loss)

Maryland (Loss)

Wake Forest (Win)

Miami (Loss)

Coastal Carolina (Win)

Florida State (Win)

NC State (Win)

Virginia (Loss)

“The” USC (Loss)

That would leave Clemson with a 6-6 record overall and 4-4 in the ACC.  We would hold the tiebreaker over every other Atlantic Division team with the exception of Maryland, which means that the Clemson Tigers could be your ACC Atlantic Division Champion.  This is particularly within the realm of possibility because no Atlantic team has beaten a Coastal team this year, and no Atlantic team has won an ACC road game.  But don’t chill the Zima just yet.

Clemson would have a .500 record, which raises the stakes in the ACC championship game.  If Clemson wins, we will be heading to Miami in the new year to play in the Orange Bowl for the first time since 1982.  If Clemson loses, we will have a losing record and will not be bowl eligible for the first time since the halcyon 1998 season, when Torry Holt torched Alex Ardley and company for four touchdowns in one game, and we kicked Tommy West to the curb – at least we had good weather, unlike this year.

But can Clemson really be ineligible for bowl selection by losing the ACC Championship Game?  Say it ain’t so!  Here is the relevant part of NCAA Bylaw 30.9.2.1 Exceptions:

“During a season in which an institution competes in 13 regular season contests, the institution must establish a record of seven wins, six losses or better to qualify for bowl selection.”

I have not found where the rules speak directly to this, but this clause leads me to believe that the ACC Championship Game would count towards the 13 regular season contests, because only bowl games are counted as non-regular season contests for FBS schools.

Can you imagine what a kick in the groin this nightmare scenario would be?  The mountains would stop yawning their greatness.  Dabo would use his house language.  Spiller would transfer to Florida, even though he doesn’t have any eligibility left.  It would take the zippity out of my doo da.

The nightmare scenario would create a need for a rule interpretation that no one ever anticipated.  I think it’s fair to say that ACC Commissioner John Swofford didn’t have this in mind when the ACC expanded and added a championship game.  I also don’t think he expected every wine-and-cheese-no-traveling-snooty-demeanor-lucky-team to become unexpectedly dominant (except for UNC.)  Talk about being born on third and thinking you hit a triple.  Clemson fans like me have flagellated ourselves for unknown sins since 1991; ACC Championship Games just fall out of the sky on other fan bases without prayer and supplication.  Expect convulsive fits from Swofford if BC or Wake go back to the ACC Championship Game.

Switching gears, I feel the need to address the fight that Dabo had with Billy Napier last Wednesday.  In his press conference Dabo downplayed the fight, and several top secret sources of mine have insisted that the fight was largely staged to motivate the team.  Putting on our thinking caps, is it credible to believe that the head coach and offensive coordinator would stage a yelling match on the day that Tiger Band was invited to practice?

Premeditated or not, some think that a Wednesday fight might make a great Clemson tradition.  Other Clemson traditions have humble origins.  Running down the hill was the shortest way to the sidelines from the locker room in Fike Field House.  Howard’s Rock was a doorstop.  If we beat Wake, then the Wednesday Fight could be a lively weekly event, and if we don’t start winning more, then the Wednesday Fight could warrant more interest than what happens on Saturdays.

What’s that you say?  I can’t chill the Zima because they don’t make Zima anymore?  Not to worry, I’ve saved a case of Zima for the next ACC Championship.  Unfortunately, I’ve had it for a very…very…very…very long time.

Please send fawning emails to sectionHrowJ@gmail.com and visit www.clemsontigernation.com.