Clemson fans have talked, bitched and moaned ad nauseam for several years now. Not that I’m trashing them; the university has earned every bit of criticism levied against it.
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Time for Direct Action
Clemson fans have talked, bitched and moaned ad nauseam for several years now. Not that I’m trashing them; the university has earned every bit of criticism levied against it.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Clemson's penchant for blowing early leads
Let first define and early lead: having one in either the first or second quarter. With normally-functioning football programs with championship-caliber coaching and an actual supportive university, this kind of thing is capitalized upon. Momentum is established and rarely, again with good football teams, is that momentum taken away.
But at Clemson, it's not rare - it's pretty damn common. At Clemson, early leads cause anxiety and stress, because we all know that an early lead only translates to plenty of chances to blow them. So let's go through, year by year, and showcase yet another wart on the Tigers' collective backside:
2010 Blown leads, early or not
vs. South Carolina: Clemson jumped out early to a 7-0 lead within two minutes of 1st quarter; lost lead eight minutes later, never scored again and proceeded to lose 7-29.
@ Florida State: 10-3 advantage entering second half; lost lead in 4th quarter, never scored another touchdown and proceeded to lose 13-16.
@ Boston College: 10-3 advantage entering second quarter; lost lead in second quarter, never scored again and proceeded to lose 10-16.
vs. then-No. 16 Miami: 14-7 advantage soon after second quarter began; lost lead just over a minute later and proceeded to lose 21-30.
@ then-No. 16 Auburn: 17-3 advantage entering second half; lost lead with under four minutes to go in third quarter and proceeded to lose 24-27 in overtime.
**Among Clemson's seven total losses, five were where Clemson blew an early lead (in either the first or second quarter). (Clemson never had a lead against USF nor UNC at all so they're not listed as blown early leads above.)
Before I go any further, let me make you aware of something - in the lists above I've included all instances where Clemson lost after having a lead at some point in the game, whether an early lead or they finally gained a late one. I write this because if I didn't showcase late leads, a lot of you numbnuts out there would whine and bitch and use it as some sort of retarded excuse to discredit facts as so many of you are prone to do.
So there are three tiers of losing at Clemson: 1) not having a lead at all (which is not in the lists above), 2) blowing late leads and 3) blowing early leads. The lists above detail both late and early leads but our focus here is early leads. Let's continue.
2009 Blown leads, early or not
vs. GT (ACC Title Game): 7-3 advantage entering second quarter; lost lead inside two minutes of second quarter and never gained another lead until 6:11 to go in the game when the Tigers went up by one point. Lost lead again at 1:20 mark in regulation and proceeded to lose 34-39.
@ South Carolina: Jumped out to early 7-0 advantage via C.J. Spiller's opening kickoff return; lost lead about nine minutes later, never regained a lead, and proceeded to lose 17-34.
@ Maryland: 13-3 advantage up until 4:32 mark in second quarter; lost lead with 35 seconds left in the half and proceeded to lose 21-24.
vs. then No. 15 TCU: 3-0 advantage at 8:21 mark in first quarter; lost lead about five minutes later, regained 10-7 lead in second quarter but lost lead again just inside fourth quarter, and proceeded to lose 10-14.
@ GT: Didn't get a lead until 11:33 in fourth quarter when the Tigers went up 27-24; lost lead six minutes later and proceeded to lose 27-30.
**Among Clemson's five total losses, four were where Clemson blew an early lead.
2008 Blown leads, early or not
vs. Nebraska (Gator Bowl): 21-10 advantage in under five minutes into the second half; never scores again, loses lead with 1:40 left in third quarter and proceeds to lose 21-26.
@ Florida State: 10-0 lead up until about six minutes into first quarter; loses lead with 4:16 left in first, regains lead at 8:17 mark in second quarter, loses lead again at 1:25 mark and proceeds to lose 27-41.
vs GT: No lead until 2:16 mark in third quarter when Clemson went up 17-14; lost lead with 5:22 left in game and proceeded to lose 17-21.
@ Wake Forest: Grabbed 7-3 advantage with seven seconds to go in third quarter; lost lead at 5:28 mark and proceeded to lose 7-12. (NOTE: This was Tommy Bowden's final game.)
vs. Maryland: 10-0 advantage entering second quarter; lost lead with 10:25 to go in game and proceeded to lose 17-20.
**In Clemson's six total losses, three were where Clemson blew an early lead. (Clemson never had a lead at all against Alabama so it's not listed as a blown early lead above.)
2007 Blown leads, early or not
vs. Auburn (Chick-fil-A Bowl): 7-3 advantage entering second half; lost lead about four minutes into third quarter, regained lead at 11:24 mark in fourth, lost lead three minutes later, regained three-point lead in overtime but lost lead on a Kodi Burns scoring run, proceeding to lose 20-23.
vs. Boston College: 10-3 advantage entering fourth quarter with Atlantic Division title on the line; lost lead a minute-and-a-half later, regained lead at 5:28 mark but lost lead again with under two minutes to go, and proceeded to lose 17-20.
@ GT: "Whopping" 3-0 lead in just over a minute into first quarter; never scored again, lost lead at 5:05 mark and proceeded to lose 3-13.
**Of Clemson's four total losses, three were where Clemson blew an early lead. (Clemson never had a lead at all against VT so it's not listed as a blown early lead above.)
So in short, over the past four seasons (and I included Bowden's last years intentionally so you Dabo Dipshits won't think I'm beating up only on him), Clemson has lost a grand total of 22 losses. Of those 22, 15 of them were where Clemson had a lead in the first or second quarter then proceeded to blow it. That's 68 percent, and this two-thirds-plus leads-blowing crap has cost the Tigers wins against arch-rival South Carolina (twice), an ACC championship, an Atlantic Division title, bowl games and a win over an ensuing national champion on their own turf.
Face it: there's absolutely no way in hell Clemson will ever get over any humps if they can't maintain early momentums for any significant length of time. And because these early leads aren't all that large to begin with (most are only 10 points), there's no way you can expect your defense to keep any good offenses out of the endzone while your offense sits on the rock and plays conservatively to run out the clock. As if you can magically speed up 30 or 45 minutes of remaining gameclock that much to keep a measly 10- or 14-point lead. Please.
If this trend continues, will Swinney lose his job? Probably not, because as long as Terry Don Phillips is running the athletics department (into the ground), Swinney will be there. Swinney is TDP's golden child, and to fire Swinney is an admission of failure by TDP, and he's way to proud for that. But with Swinney at the helm, you can count on blowing early leads and continue Clemson's fine tradition of "WTF" losses.
Swinney can scold the fans countless more times for being quacky, crazy and irrelevant, and he can ban media access to this person or that all he wants. But the continues losing will happen because, well, he's Dabo Swinney - a former real estate agent who thinks he can actually talk his way out of losing.
Monday, March 07, 2011
Swinney’s media lockout good and bad, but why?
- Swinney will no longer do one-on-one interviews with local media, including radio.
- No media access to assistant coaches.
- Only the coordinators will be available to media.
- Freshman players won’t be available for interviews until week of the first game
- No media access to grad assistants, strength coaches, player development coaches, and so on.
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Clemson fans officially enter Austerity
Sunday, December 05, 2010
It's over - Max Lennon has won.
Friday, November 19, 2010
Fan departures and the hypocritical pumper backlash
So I perused a Clemson fansite and came across this 25-year-old guy whose only Clemson football experience is the dreaded Hatfield and West years. To wit: he never experienced what a championship Clemson team.
You know about message boards, right? Those whose posters coach Dabo Swinney referred to as “irrelevant” in his post-game press conference after the inexplicable loss to Florida State? The third swipe he’s taken at fans this season?
Dude went on to say that he’s quitting his Clemson patronage after this season because he’s sick of it.
Gotta say, I’m impressed with the forethought and wisdom in this young man, as he is seeing the writing on the wall at such an early age, a wall scrawling that people twice his age have yet to realize.
It is indeed disheartening, discouraging, and every other dis to be a Clemson football fan nowadays. No conference title in almost 20 years, no 10-win season, no BCS bowl invite, nothing. It’s become a waste of time, energy and money for many fans, and this 25-year-old has accepted this fact at such an early age.
Gives you a glimmer of hope that those of his age aren’t all a bunch of Jersey Shore-watching, Facebook-posting, Halo-3 nerdberries.
There were some who understood his pain but, as expected, there was a backlash from the Pumper commune.
“Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”
“Calm down.”
“While you’re at it cancel your subscription.”
“Take all those fair-weather fans with you.”
Those are a few of the comments. The fact these come from the Pumpers is funny on many levels.
Funny strange, not funny ha-ha.
First, the pumpers are largely the group that bitch and moan about the “haters” dividing the fanbase with their negativity. Yet when a fed-up fan decides to quit on Clemson, which I understand completely, they launch into said fan, effectively dividing the fanbase themselves with their negativity.
But the haters largely direct their negativity toward Swinney, Terry Don Phillips, James Barker and the board of trustees. These morons, on the other hand, direct their negativity at other fans and, in sleight of hand fashion, at the players with their “we don't have the talent we think we do” crap. So, who is dividing the fanbase more?
Second, I’ve noticed after an inexplicable loss, which are many, when the realists launch into Swinney, TDP, etc then the pumpers come out and say something like “it’s just a game.” But when a fan such as the guy above realizes it is just that and gives it up, the same pumpers launch into him for not being a true fan like them. They basically bid a nasty farewell by saying “good riddance, we don’t need fans like you!”
But I thought this was just a game, right? If it’s just a game, then why are you getting all riled up over a fan who decides this so-called “game” is no longer worth his time and resources and decides to live life differently?
To the pumpers, it is just a game when Clemson loses. But when Clemson wins it is the start of something “special”. And when a justifiably disgruntled fan departs, these same people label him as a bad fan.
The pumper crowd rears its duplicitous head when fans decide to take direct action instead of pouring money into a failed program and burn a candle by their bedside hoping for the best as they do. It’s like the pumpers want the whole of Clemson’s fanbase to be just like them - a throng of rubes who are continually taken on a ride by the university’s marketing and public relations arms. To dutifully eat the same old shit sandwich the university feeds them and like it out of some warped moral obligation to “the kids”.
Clearly, Clemson’s fanbase is still divided into two distinct camps - the “true” fans, a.k.a. the pumpers, and the realists, a.k.a., the haters. Who knows the percentage of each but judging the message boards it appears slightly in favor of the realists but not by much.
But it’s rather like Congress. Sure one party has a majority, but there’s still enough of the minority party to be obstructionist and bring everything to a halt.
Until Clemson’s fanbase gets to about three-fourths of one side or the other, you’ll have this infighting but the infighting will continue regardless if the underachievement continues. Hopefully the future three-fourths will be those with a brain and clear vision and will see the deplorable state the football program is in and demand (not hope for) change.
But forget all this verbose bluster - I thought it was just a game?
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Swinney insults fans for third time
"We still have a lot out there, trying to get bowl eligible this week."
"Last night, offensively, just missed opportunities. We moved the ball down the field but again some kicking miscues that cost us some points in the red zone. For whatever reason that's where our miscues are coming."
"...we have several dinged up"
"We have a lot of good things happening in recruiting and a bunch of good kids we've redshirted."
"I don't pay any attention to what some people on some message board may say. That's totally irrelevant to what reality is."
"There will be a time where we'll look back at this and we'll say 'Wow, we've made a lot of progress.'"
