South Carolina Preview

Clemson vs. South Carolina, 11/28, 12:00pm, Williams-Brice Stadium

This will be pretty short, I'm still trying to shake the disappointment of the A&M game. I'll write some more about it later, but I think this is a stark reminder that the team is a work in progress.

Tigermax:

Check out this lede to the front page sports story in the State, 9/25:

The 28-year wait is over: South Carolina finally bagged its big-game trophy.

(If your really into schadenfreude, read some of the posted comments at the the story)

Yes, those were heady days for Gamecrock fans--a win over #4 Ole Miss and a near victory over Georgia (on the road) the week before. Combined with the early season struggles of Clemson, the night of 9/25 must have felt like something of a watershed moment: the signal of the ascendancy of Gamekook football in the state of South Carolina.

Flash forward to today. Clemson has won six straight, riding an improbably realistic Heisman campaign into the ACC Championship game. South Carolina is in yet another mid-season swoon, losing what, 4 straight? (I've lost track). Meanwhile, Ole Miss and Georgia have both logged spectacularly average SEC seasons while South Carolina has been stomped by SEC "luminaries" Arkansas and Tennessee. Hey, at least you beat Vanderbilt. Yes, you beat a 2-10 team by the score of 14-10 at home. The old Spurrier teams would have lost that game.

I'm not going to offer any deep insight into the 2009 annual South Carolina midseason collapse (trademarked). That's because its really quite simple: they were never that good to begin with. Lots of close wins and losses in the early season obscured how average a team they really were. In fact, FEI ranks them the #50 team in the country. To give some context, Virginia is ranked #42. Yes, the defense grades out a strong #18, but they are killed by a #75 offense and awful special teams. And before any Gamecocks start grousing, FEI does take into account strength of schedule. You see, it may be hard to own up to, but the SEC is in the middle of a down year.

To be clear, the SEC is probably still a better conference top to bottom than the ACC. FEI has had a slight ACC-slant that we've documented here over the season. But the gap isn't as large as some might think. The ACC has a lot of programs trending in the right direction while the SEC has a quite a few teams trending in the wrong direction.

Also to be clear, I think South Carolina has more talent on defense than Virginia. They lack talented depth, however, which is what keeps them from being a nationally-feared defense on the level of, let me just pick a random team here, I don't know: Clemson. Yeah, that's a good defense.

Clemson has some concerns. The white elephant in the room is the health of CJ Spiller. He's looked progressively worse over the last 3-4 weeks, and we could really use him to take advantage in the special teams game. Also, while the offense's performance against Virginia was encouraging, I anticipate South Carolina will be a bit more physical; they should be up to stopping the run at least in the early going.

If Clemson keeps the game close in the first half, I think they run away in the second half. The South Carolina defense is too thin, and their crappy kicking and coverage game coupled with Spurrier's oversized ego almost ensures Spiller and Ford deliver excellent field position. Hope you're ready for a breakout road performance, Richard Jackson.

Clemben:

I peaked at quite a few South Carolina games this season. I think they are a decent team. They are probably as talented, if not slightly more than last year's team USuCk team (last years team was hopelessly selfish and fractured in the locker room however, Spurrier really 'lost' that team). I think it really begins at QB for the shamecocks and Garcia. I am absolutely shocked that he hasnt been injured this year. I have seen him make a bunch of gutsy/stupid plays, hurling himself into the air. He is durable and has some moxie, other USC QB's had arms but would predictably and almost comically turn the ball over. Garcia's maturation has been notable.

Next Alshon Jeffery is really good. Watching out redshirt freshman WR's struggle and then watching true freshman Jeffery run routes and catch some great balls has been frustrating. If he goes to the real 'USC', where he was committed to up until the end, USuCk isnt close to the team they are on offense. I wont argue with a coot on this one, I hope he takes off to the NFL asap. This season we are fine with our secondary, although in the past couple of games we have been giving up a few too many chunk yardage plays. (haha, how did chunk yards get in the vernacular??) Few interceptions

Lastly I really like some of the defensive talent along the line that Skarelina has amassed. The health of Cliff Matthews is a big issue, Geathers is really developing and Ladi can be a beast. This will be a good barometer for how much our OLine has improved. You'll remember that last year we were able to push around their D-Line before running into trouble with a boy named Suh in the gator bowl.

So what will be the difference in this game. I think it will be a ten point game...and of course I think we will win. The LB's need to have a better game, would really like to land Justin Parker but that keeps getting more difficult. The game comes down to third down conversions. We have gotten much better throughout our winning streak in converting third downs. If we can demoralize WBrice prison early then the place will be empty by the fourth quarter. Remember when Spurrier gave up last year, conceded the game? Cant wait to see that again...6-6 and the independence bowl?? Now that is just one season away!! Clemson 27-17

FEI Week 10; ACC Outlook Update

Clemson rises to #9 from #13 in the latest FEI rankings. A lot of this is inflated by the ACC spotting the 6-9 teams in the rankings. In fairness, though, a lot of the ACC movement results from the teams that were ahead last week dropping like rocks this week--Oregon, Iowa, Oklahoma, Boise State, and Pitt.

Clemson's schedule eases up the last three weeks, playing three sub-forty teams including next week at #55 NC State. A lot of parallels will be drawn in general terms to the on-field results of NC State and FSU this season, both feature bad defenses and good offenses. Looking at it a little closer, though, NC State features the 11th ranked offense in the country, but its still a relatively large step down from the FSU offense. Meanwhile, they've struggled with the #68 defense, but this is instead a relatively large step up from the FSU defense. These two observations might indicate that NC State will give Clemson the same amount of trouble as FSU, but this overlooks field position advantage. Clemson ranks #12 on the legs of Spiller and Ford, while NC State is an abysmal #115 (out of 120). If Clemson pulls away early, it could very well be on the strength of special teams.

Here's how I see the last two ACC games:
Clemson is still projected to finish 5-3 or 6-2; but we increase our odds slightly over BC because we have two games remaining instead of three (easier to go 2-0 than 3-0). If we win this week though, it just about sinks BC who still has what looks like an increasingly tough UNC game left on their schedule.

FEI Week 9; ACC Outlook Update

Whooosh! That was the sound of the ACC dropping like a rock in this weeks FEI rankings. GT is the lone top 10 survivor (#8), but it looks like the combination of VT losing, GT giving up crazy points to a terrible Vandy offense, and Miami barely getting by WF managed to drag the entire conference down. Clemson, despite playing a Division II team and which is not included in the ranking calculations, dropped from #13 to #15, probably stemming from the drop in strength of schedule. FSU is still ranked at #18, probably because FEI gives them the third best offense in the country. Clemson's 6th best defense is going to have to be on its toes. Luckily, FSU is also ranked #98 in defense.

Here's the updated ACC outlook for the Tigers. Virginia improves following their loss at home against Duke. But I saw enough from both teams in the FSU-NC state game to leave them untouched:
With Virginia moving into "Lock", the projected wins are probably closer to 2.5-3 at this point. Even so, if we manage a victory against FSU on Saturday I still won't be breathing easy until the Tigers beat the Wolfpack in Raleigh.

FEI Week 8; ACC Outlook Update

In the week 8 edition of the FEI, Clemson moves up from #21 to #13 after bouncing the previous #4, Miami dropped to #6 (Miami was an 18 point favorite last Saturday by FEI's reckoning). You can see the expanded FEI is now available at FootballOutsiders, just follow the link. Now we can see the justification for Clemson's high ranking--FEI has us at the 3rd strongest schedule in the country (thanks TCU, Georgia Tech) and while we grade out #42 on offense, we're all the way up at #8 on defense. By the way, FEI treats Division II (or whatever its called now) teams as a bye, hence no ranking for Coastal Carolina. Also: FEI says Central Michigan will give BC all they can handle on Saturday.

The Ken Massey meta-rankings has Clemson rise from #40 all the way to #25. I have to say, if you plotted the rankings of the two systems week to week, I think we'd see a lot less fluctuation in FEI thus far.

On to the updated ACC chart:
Despite winning in Miami, I don't see any reason to change the rest of the chart. I figured based on matchups that Miami could only be considered the "lean" favorite, which gave us a reasonable chance of pulling it out. In the end, I don't think Saturday's performance justifies giving Clemson better odds the rest of the way. On the other hand, GT confirmed my suspicion about the shallow nature of Virginia's ACC season "revival", and I'm close to putting the Virginia game in the Clemson "lock" column. Maybe next week. Meanwhile, the FSU-NC State game will likely have implications for next week's update.

What last Saturday really did for the Tigers was to improve their odds of taking the ACC. The range of likely outcomes for Clemson went from a 4-6 win spread to a 5-6 win spread. I still have to give BC the slightest of edges to win the division due to their weak conference schedule, but its something close to 5:4 odds while Clemson is at around 4:5. Its essentially a two-team race, with WF and FSU needing the complete implosion of both Clemson and BC to have a chance.

FEI Weeks 6 and 7

In all the bye week laziness I missed the FEI update. Clemson dropped from #22 all the way down to #30 after the bye, somewhat inexplicably. After walloping Wake last week, they're up to #21. The computers still believe in us! The bad news: Miami is ranked #5. I think it's important to remember that "advanced statistics" like this will rank teams according to strength, but don't necessarily capture how well a team might match up with another. I'll elaborate more in the preview, but I think this is a case where the matchup works in Clemson's favor, which should at least keep us from getting blown out on Saturday.

Ken Massey has us at #40 after the Wake game, up a few notches from #44 two weeks ago.

FEI Week 5; Bye Week Edition

Best thing about a bye week: well, nothing really. Particularly coming off an embarrassing loss. At least we have time to perfect our nearly-perfect offensive execution. So, any early thoughts on how we look come gametime next Saturday? I'm thinking it could either be much worse on offense or about the same, depending on whether the coaches completely lose the players. My guess is Swinney pulls off his best motivational effort yet: instead of getting much worse, we simply remain mediocre. But I'm the realist side of the blog, see ClemBen's post below if you want a sunnier take on the situation.

Anyways, FEI is out. If you're wondering why I'm interested in this ranking system, see my initial post here. Clemson tumbles yet again, this time from #14 to #22. Maryland rose all of three notches, from #90 to #87. I'm not sure I'm understanding the logic here. The ACC lands two top five teams, VT and Miami at #3 and #4, respectively. Actually, the Coastal Division is actually looking pretty respectable. Unfortunately for us, here's a SAT-style analogy that about sums things up: Coastal Division:American League :: Atlantic Division:National League.

Ken Massey has us dropping all the way down from #29 to #44. I'd say that's about right.

FEI Week 4

Another pitiful week for the ACC. Clemson, arguably acquitting itself the best in out-of-conference excitement, only drops four slots to #15. We're now ranked as the second best team in the country with two losses! Only Florida State comes out better, ranked #11. Why, you ask? Their losses have come at the hands of #9 Miami and #14 South Florida. Why are Miami and South Florida ranked so high? I have absolutely no idea...Florida bias, maybe? TCU moves all the way up to #10.

These rankings are still looking strange, but it's not like the Very Serious Polls (AP/Coaches) are performing any better. I still hold out hope FEI stabilizes in a few weeks to something a little more believable. Something we can all agree on, though: Maryland ranked #90. It's time for a rout.

Ken Massey's aggregate rankings have Clemson falling from #26 to #29, with Maryland at #97. It's time for a rout.

FEI Week 3; More OL Venting

Clemson up three spots to #11, likely the result of beating the #26 team BC. If BC keeps playing like it did last Saturday, I expect we won't be benefiting from that victory too much longer. For those of you interested, TCU is at #27, so this Saturday should be just another repeat of the BC game, right?

Clemson took a big jump in the Ken Massey aggregate rankings, up at #23 after being #36 last week. TCU tumbled from #10 to #15. It was a rough week for Mountain West schools, and a relatively good week for the ACC. Hey, maybe FEI wasn't terribly wrong after all? Clemson-TCU will give us another data point in the analysis.

Also wanted to draw attention to this excellent post on the offensive line a few days back by DrB. The ClemPson guys are prolific writers, so it might have slipped through unnoticed. Somehow I also missed the post from last year, which is much the same effect. Just to highlight a couple of passages, but really, it should be read in its entirety. Here, when talking about where to spread the blame for the O-line failures:

Whose fault is this? Brad Scott's. He has been OL coach since Spence came on staff. He is regarded as one of the best? By who? Show me who comes calling for him? Brad can recruit in this state, and has built many contacts, but what good does it do us to recruit and not develop? Was that lesson not learned over the last 9 years? If you bring them in and they do nothing, its on the coach. Its either bad evaluation in the beginning, or bad development; either way its on Scott.

In my eyes, in the last 2-3 years Clemson has been plagued by two problems that have absolutely infuriated the fanbase because they shouldn't happen with proper coaching: 1) poor tackling technique on defense and 2) inability to get any kind of push from the offensive line in the run game (we can debate the line play in 2007, there were obviously multiple factors going on there--but I think everyone agrees the level of play on the O-line was well below expectation). Its still early and there have been some relapses (first quarter of the GT game) but problem #1 looks like it is coming under control after one offseason under Kevin Steele. Thank God. Problem #2, however, looks about as bad as ever. There are flashes of ability mixed into every game (even in the BC game), but nothing resembling consistency has materialized.

But to tell the truth, we are not missing assignments altogether...We are BLOCKING the guy we're supposed to hit, but we arent PUSHING him anywhere, that comes down to technique. Its one thing to hit your man, but its another to knock him on his ass...Our technique is what needs work, thats what a coach is there for.

I can't pretend to know the politics in the Clemson athletic department or the football team. But what I can say, and what I tried to point out in my last post below, is that it seems that Swinney has at least some grasp of the strengths and weaknesses of the team and has tried to make changes appropriately (unlike his baffling predecessor). I refuse to believe that he doesn't see the O-line struggles; he's seen the deterioration along the O-line first-hand. Maybe Pearman was brought in as a way to "push" Brad Scott, give him some motivation. But that begs the question as to why he just wasn't removed in the first place, its not like he's got a stable of hand-picked 5-star recruits for 2010. There has to be something going on here that hopefully resolves itself before the start of the next offseason. Or maybe, just maybe, we see some real improvement one of these weeks?

However if Thomas Austin is so good, and Hairston is the "Spiller of the OL" as Dabo says, why do we not have HUGE holes open on the left side and more run plays designed to go there?...This tells me that either Austin and Hairston arent the all-star types they've been made out to be, or Napier is dumb. Its one or the other.

One minor quibble here--it could easily be both.

FEI Week 2

Clemson rises two notches from #16 to #14. Taking the #10 team to the final minute on their home turf helps the cause, I guess. The problem comes when the system over-rates an entire conference. Three ACC teams in the top 15? Doesn't seem likely given the early results.

Ken Massey's meta-rankings, which aggregates 46 rankings into a single score, pegs Clemson at 36 with no ACC teams in the top 15--VT grades out the highest at 19. Sounds a little more reasonable, but on the other hand, it has TCU at 10.

From what I can see most of the Ken Massey ranking systems are Sagarin-type ratings, basing their rankings on margin of victory and strength of opponent. These are fairly crude measures of team strength, but I'd have to give them the upper hand on FEI, for now. We'll see how the rest of the season plays out.

Georgia Tech Preview

Clemson vs. Georgia Tech, 9/10, 7:30pm, Bobby Dodd Stadium

Tigermax:

Battle of top 20 teams!! In FEI ratings, of course. I think every Clemson fan has had this day circled on the calendar for quite a few months now. Its easy to see why--this is a yardstick game for the season, based on the results I think we'll have a pretty good idea of how the season could play out barring a devastating injury or three down the road. Here are three general game outcomes followed by what I anticipate will be my visceral reaction: 1) We get blown out--"Well, that was crap. When's basketball season start again?" 2) Win or lose, we keep it close--"Wow, maybe I'm underselling this whole leadership thing. We should be right in it this year". 3) We blow them out--"WOOOOOOOOoooooooooo...wait. That was a fluke. I can't wait for the crash".

Yes, the Bowden years have conditioned me well.

I'm really looking forward to this game, though. It matches up two teams that play to each others strengths. GT relies on its offense while we counter with our defense. I give GT the slight edge here, and Clemson will have to make things up by outplaying the GT defense. In general I thought week one was encouraging, if they finish plays a little better I think we can score some on GT (in contrast to past years at Bobby Dodd.) But even then, we still have to overcome homefield advantage. I give the edge to GT, but with a big play or two from special teams or defense we'll be right there at the end of the game.

FEI Ratings and Clemson

Haven't talked to much about advanced statistics and college football, because I generally feel they are worth talking about. There are two major problems: 1) Each play in football relies on so many small, individual contributions adding up to a result that its extremely difficult to model and 2) the sample size of plays and possessions is small relative to other sports. This is particularly problematic in college football when trying to compare two teams in different conferences, because there simply aren't enough of these games.

That being said, I find Fremeau Efficiency Index (FEI) over at BCF Toys pretty interesting, at least as accurate as the different weekly top 25 polls engineered by different packs of "Smooth" Jimmy Apollos. Not to mention the bastard offspring of those polls, the BCS. They get around the first problem, more or less, by calculating drive-based efficiencies, and not worrying about individual contributions. (Basically assuming that these things will level out over time at a drive-by-drive level). They get around the second problem by, well, they really don't. There's not much you can do but to go with the sample size you've got, not the one you wish you had. I wouldn't start gambling my life savings with FEI, but its certainly useful to get a overall feel of how strong a team's defense and offense is.

At any rate, how did Clemson fare in the preseason? We were #10 in the country (like I said, its far from perfect...hahaha). This ranking was entirely rooted in the strength of our defense, ranked #1. Again, I think you'd have a hard time convincing even the stoutest Clemson fan we have the best defense in the country, although I think you could argue we're in the top twenty pretty easily. But I digress. Our offense was rated 47 out of 116, a below average offense when viewed in the context of the ACC. If anything, I thought that was probably a bit generous, too.

How do we look after week #1? Dropped 6 slots to #16. As the weeks roll on, I'll be expecting a freefall lot of fluctuation, which will stabilize at least after a while. If not, well, advanced stats in football are still a work in progress.