|
Replies: 28
| visibility 3024
|
Webmaster [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
Posts: 45353
Joined: 2012
|
TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
1
Nov 4, 2024, 8:56 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [5701]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
2
Nov 4, 2024, 9:10 AM
|
|
How did the coaches grade?.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1199]
TigerPulse: 100%
26
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
2
Nov 4, 2024, 9:36 AM
|
|
Coaches got a D minus.
Do BETTER!
Go Tigers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [59969]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 61356
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
Nov 4, 2024, 3:48 PM
|
|
A D- probably could have won that game, so I disagree with the D- grade, it was much lower than that, but I think that an F is the lowest but, IMO it was lower than a F, even lower than a F-!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5927]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6867]
TigerPulse: 95%
41
|
approx 61% of the approx 170rushing yards from Mafah after losing 26-7
1
Nov 4, 2024, 9:39 AM
|
|
Louisville Score Clemson Score Mafah Yards Pecentage Cumulative %
0 0 3 2% 2%
3 0 13 8% 9%
3 7 6 4% 13%
10 7 32 19% 32%
17 7 2 1% 33%
23 7 10 6% 39%
26 7 73 43% 82%
26 14 0 0% 82%
33 14 31 18% 100%
33 21 0 0% 100%
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19650]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 15028
Joined: 2010
|
Re: approx 61% of the approx 170rushing yards from Mafah after losing 26-7
2
Nov 4, 2024, 10:03 AM
|
|
If I'm reading that right Mafah and Tigers achieved most of their yardage when the score was out of hand, and Louisville coaches and schemes were ceding the run. Yes? No?
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet GOAT [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
|
Re: approx 61% of the approx 170rushing yards from Mafah after losing 26-7
3
Nov 4, 2024, 10:12 AM
|
|
Combo of factors for sure. Louisville was smothering the pass in coverage most of the game and content to allow some gains on the ground as the clock ran late. The holes weren't there for Mafah when the game was closer. I think they also mixed some things up later in how they got the ball to Mafah and found some success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2339]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Basically.
2
Nov 4, 2024, 10:54 AM
|
|
We s- u- c- k- e- d b- u- t- t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Protector [1464]
TigerPulse: 100%
29
|
Re: Basically.
3
Nov 4, 2024, 11:35 AM
|
|
I feel like we should move back to the 4-3 defense and put Sammy out there with woodaz and Barrett. This nickel defense gets run all over on. I’d put money Sammy can cover any TE or slot with his athletic skills. I really think it would help out with the run and also help get pressure on the QB, which we have been missing this year. PWoo just not the outside guy we need, he’s much better inside the line imo. Go Tigers!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [775]
TigerPulse: 94%
22
|
Re: Basically.
1
Nov 4, 2024, 11:46 AM
|
|
Carter needs to sit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [28633]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 15978
Joined: 2015
|
Re: Basically.
Nov 4, 2024, 3:08 PM
|
|
Carter needs to sit.
Yeah... that's a great idea to sit a semifinalist for butkus award....
🙄🙄🙄😑😑😑
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [59969]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 61356
Joined: 2007
|
Re: Basically.
1
Nov 4, 2024, 3:53 PM
|
|
Carter needs to be coached and put in a position where he could create havoc for the QB...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [913]
TigerPulse: 100%
24
|
Re: Basically.
1
Nov 4, 2024, 11:53 AM
[ in reply to Re: Basically. ] |
|
A friend of mine and I both shared this opinion Saturday- before the game. After the game we were even more convinced that is the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11846]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: Basically.
1
Nov 4, 2024, 12:53 PM
[ in reply to Re: Basically. ] |
|
100% correct
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [518]
TigerPulse: 100%
19
|
Re: Basically.
1
Nov 4, 2024, 9:53 PM
[ in reply to Re: Basically. ] |
|
I think you're right. Woodaz can pass cover, too. Need to change something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8122]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
3
Nov 4, 2024, 11:54 AM
|
|
I’ll give everyone an F!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [59969]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 61356
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
1
Nov 4, 2024, 3:55 PM
|
|
I'll agree with you if you change that to a F-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11846]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
2
Nov 4, 2024, 12:54 PM
|
|
Either I missed it or the special teams did not rate high enough to get a grade!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2914]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
Prepositional dilemma
1
Nov 4, 2024, 1:18 PM
|
|
Not sure about the use of “but” as a preposition in the sentence below. 3rd lowest is the same as 5th best when you’re talking about 7 data points…
“Klubnik’s overall PFF grade was his fifth-best on the season (71.2), but specifically as a passer, it was his third-lowest mark (68).”
Grammar Police
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 100%
30
|
Re: Prepositional dilemma
1
Nov 4, 2024, 2:23 PM
|
|
Came to ask this as well. That said, I don't particularly think Cade was anywhere close to our biggest problem, even on offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [59969]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 61356
Joined: 2007
|
Re: Prepositional dilemma
1
Nov 4, 2024, 3:57 PM
|
|
He wasn't the kid played really hard IMO!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet GOAT [∞]
TigerPulse: 100%
∞
|
Re: Prepositional dilemma
Nov 4, 2024, 3:05 PM
[ in reply to Prepositional dilemma ] |
|
That is true, but we're on to eight data points now. Anyway, there's not much of a distinction and I could've written it better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1515]
TigerPulse: 100%
30
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
1
Nov 4, 2024, 2:24 PM
|
|
As abysmal as the offense and defensive lines were, my biggest issue is with the blocked kicks. How does a D1 program have THAT BIG OF A PROBLEM with blocking for a FG that 2 get blocked? This wasn't some speedster timing the snap and running around, they just ran through our line twice. Those 6 points would have been massive at keeping us in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22003]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 14269
Joined: 1995
|
Inexcusable and embarrassing, no other way to see it.***
1
Nov 4, 2024, 3:12 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [59969]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
Posts: 61356
Joined: 2007
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
Nov 4, 2024, 4:08 PM
[ in reply to Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville? ] |
|
I could be wrong but I don't think Hauser is getting enough lift right off his foot. It's every kick was meant for making 40 plus yard field goals. If he can't change his lift right off of his foot, maybe the holder should back up 2 yards, at least that might stop players from getting a hand on the ball. Is there a rule for the distance that the holder has to be from where the ball is spotted?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [5]
TigerPulse: 100%
1
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
1
Nov 4, 2024, 5:53 PM
|
|
How could a LB only have one tackle the whole game? Very poor showing. Must have been sleep walking through the game. I think it boils down to poor coaching for two weeks. Kids not ready!
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [518]
TigerPulse: 100%
19
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
Nov 4, 2024, 10:01 PM
|
|
Carter is supposedly our star LB. ONE TACKLE ALL NIGHT?? ###?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3717]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: TNET: How did Cade Klubnik, more Tigers grade in loss to Louisville?
Nov 4, 2024, 10:34 PM
|
|
Did they run to the other side?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 28
| visibility 3024
|
|
|
50
