Help me understand why UNC is a more winnable game than Clemson

[MadNY3]

In Millhouse's awesomely dickish thread, numerous people commented on how we can expect a better performance against UNC. Admittedly, I haven't watched them, but for spurts here and there. They are ranked 14th in the country, which is better than Clemson was ranked when we played them.

So, what logic stimulates the 'we should feel better about this game' synapse?

Shouldn't this be an even bigger loss?

Because we already lost to Clemson and we have not played UNC. So definitely more winnable because IT’S THE FUTURE.

 

[MadNY3]

What?

That is just stupid. They’ve had 10 three and outs in 5 games. 3 when the second and third strings were in.

Those same five games 23 offensive tds and 6 fgs on 62 possessions.

When 80% of the data was collected from playing overmatched teams, I’m not sure the historical data set gives one satisfying proof.

 

[qdawgg]

What does that mean?

They are tenth in 3rd down conversions, 17th in scoring, 19th in long plays, 25th in total offense, 8th in red zone attempts

what’s not consistent?

Just a crazy thought here. Some of those numbers may be a bit inflated based on our competition. We aren’t going to be 10th in 3rd down conversions at the end of the year or 8th in the red zone. I know it sounds crazy but all the teams we play won’t be Colgate and WMU.

 

[GoSU96]

When 80% of the data was collected from playing overmatched teams, I’m not sure the historical data set gives one satisfying proof.

You have one data point against the best defense they’ll play. If Purdue counts as over matched, so do the last fives teams SU plays.

I’ll take that every year

 

[GoSU96]

Just a crazy thought here. Some of those numbers may be a bit inflated based on our competition. We aren’t going to be 10th in 3rd down conversions at the end of the year or 8th in the red zone. I know it sounds crazy but all the teams we play won’t be Colgate and WMU.

It’s was a comment to what he said about performance to date.

Where did I say that was going to continue?

If they don’t have more major injuries they won’t be held in the teens or under 300 the rest of the year. I suspect it will be better than that.

 

[SUbear]

Clempsun is a better team.

If the Orangemen don't make a lot of mistakes (penalties, turnovers) then it should be a close game.
As predicted elsewhere, a 31-27 Orange victory!

Yeah just do not fumble twice in the first quarter and we at least have a competitive game.

 

[SUbear]

I was at the game in the 300 level, pretty great view. The issue was Garrett having no time, the WR had space pretty consistently

Our line was no bueno, Shrader had no time and Clemson did not allow him to get out of the pocket.

 

[Brian Orange]

I know being home factored into it but there is a reason many were more confident to beat Clemson than UNC. This game feels high scoring, Shrader being an absolute warrior but UNC just scoring too much.

 

[MadNY3]

You have one data point against the best defense they’ll play. If Purdue counts as over matched, so do the last fives teams SU plays.

I’ll take that every year

That’s fair.

(And yes, Purdue stinks, but fair.)

 

[qdawgg]

I’ve said it already but if we don’t contain their QB it’ll be a tough game to win. Otherwise I think we have a decent chance.

 

[Reilly35]

why is UNC a better offense.

Clem played Duke, SU
UNC has played?? Pitt I guess who is a mess.

Look at the App St film. Could be a shoot out

 

[upperdeck]

if we can score , we are in good shape.

 

[MikeSU02]

I was at the game in the 300 level, pretty great view. The issue was Garrett having no time, the WR had space pretty consistently

If Hatcher kept running off his line once he was big boy’d, that’s not the right space to be in.

There is way more to passing and catching then *any* space.

That’s if he didn’t just pull up because he got big boy’d 2x in a row by two different CBs.

 

[swish7]

Because we already lost to Clemson and we have not played UNC. So definitely more winnable because IT’S THE FUTURE.

Very true.

 

[swish7]

Because even tho Clemson came into that game 2-2 statistically they beat FSU and Duke.

The Duke game was they had some flukey fumbles.

FSU they lost because they missed a field goal at the end of the game, from a field goalie kicker who “retired” that they enticed to come back the week before? He had just got enough practices to be available the day of.

While Clemson isn’t a “top 25” team, they had athletes that are a top 5 team in the nation, no doubt.


UNC has a pretty awful defense. Their offense, is electric.

There’s a reason that at home, UNC was only favored by about a TD

Thank you. Much appreciated.

 

[swish7]

I don’t think their Dline is as big as Clemson, but I’m hearing that they are faster.

This will be worth paying attention to

 

[swish7]

This has 56-0 written all over it.

I remember the first one of those, at Va Tech I believe. Man, that was brutal.

 

[swish7]

Really? Because they are ranked higher than Clemson when we played them we can’t possibly do better against them? How long have you watched football? No offense but I am dumber after reading this “ logic”.

Man, 20ish years of this and the personalities do not change

 

[Dcuse]

Man, 20ish years of this and the personalities do not change

Wouldn't want to disappoint you.

 

[cuse309]

In Millhouse's awesomely dickish thread, numerous people commented on how we can expect a better performance against UNC. Admittedly, I haven't watched them, but for spurts here and there. They are ranked 14th in the country, which is better than Clemson was ranked when we played them.

So, what logic stimulates the 'we should feel better about this game' synapse?

Shouldn't this be an even bigger loss?

We have a better chance, because we can't possibly play worse than we did against Clemson...right?

 

[swish7]

I think the question is matchups. Can Shrader do Shrader things better against UNC than he could against Clemson? How does our defense match up with UNC compared to Clemson? I think Clemson's QB is better than he's getting credit for. He made plays against us, so I don't think the difference between UNC's offense and Clemson's is necessarily that big. I don't think UNC's defense is as physical as Clemson's, so that should benefit us. UNC deserves to be favored, but I think the gap between us and them is smaller than us and Clemson. We need to play clean though or it won't matter.

I thought Klubnik was brilliant and the folks calling him pedestrian were way off.

 

[Dcuse]

I thought Klubnik was brilliant and the folks calling him pedestrian were way off.

However if we catch routinely catchable balls, he throws at least 2 pick 6's- maybe 3. That brilliance is suddenly a different word.

 

[swish7]

Pitt is level with Purdue , not sure on that. They (UNC) had an impressive win against SC , They go OT with App State, Beat a hapless Pitt . If we don’t turn the ball over the Clemson game goes to the wire. We have to protect GS better, if we do we will be right there.

If Shrader doesn't take that hit that causes that first turnover, I don't think he makes the 2nd turnover, and I don't think Wax gets deflated or whatever happened to him (after we went down 14 in Q1), and I agree, it would have been a completely different game.

The receivers probably still drop the ball though, and Shrader probably still is off on his passes, but I think it would be more like a 20-17 type of game.

 

[Dcuse]

If Shrader doesn't take that hit that causes that first turnover, I don't think he makes the 2nd turnover, and I don't think Wax gets deflated or whatever happened to him (after we went down 14 in Q1), and I agree, it would have been a completely different game.

The receivers probably still drop the ball though, and Shrader probably still is off on his passes, but I think it would be more like a 20-17 type of game.

Agreed.

 

[storange]

However if we catch routinely catchable balls, he throws at least 2 pick 6's- maybe 3. That brilliance is suddenly a different word.

Wax is a pick 6