Shades of Sark

RoadDawg55

Other than being 13-0 entering the game, but still...

KO return for TD

Onside kick

WR running completely free for TD

General soft play

That game was a textbook example of a better coach buttfucking the other guy.

doogsinparadise

Soft?

Southerndawg

doogsinparadise said:

Soft?

Agreed. They were hitting hard and did a great job in containing Henry. Big plays and ST were the difference for Bama.

RoadDawg55

doogsinparadise said:

Soft?

Didn't make plays when it mattered.

RoadDawg55

Southerndawg said:

doogsinparadise said:

Soft?

Agreed. They were hitting hard and did a great job in containing Henry. Big plays and ST were the difference for Bama.

Which is why I titled this thread "Shades of Sark."

Southerndawg

RoadDawg55 said:

Southerndawg said:

doogsinparadise said:

Soft?

Agreed. They were hitting hard and did a great job in containing Henry. Big plays and ST were the difference for Bama.

Which is why I titled this thread "Shades of Sark."

Clemson didn't play soft and they didn't get plungered. Give credit where credit is due. They did get out coached, but that shouldn't be a shocker. Swinney isn't Saban, nor is just about any other coach short of Meyer.

doogsinparadise

RoadDawg55 said:

doogsinparadise said:

Soft?

Didn't make plays when it mattered.

Ok, but that's not soft.

HuskyJW

General soft play?

Have another drink.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

RoadDawg55 said:

Other than being 13-0 entering the game, but still...

KO return for TD

Onside kick

WR running completely free for TD

General soft play

That game was a textbook example of a better coach buttfucking the other guy.

I agree with you and was thinking the same thing except the soft play comment. Clemson did a great job of defending Henry in the second half.

AtomicDawg

Clemson came back and took the lead at one point. Sark teams never come back and wilt once they lose a lead.

dnc

Shades of Sark? Sark hardly ever lost close, when Sark lost he got destroyed. Shades of Peterman maybe.

Clemson played a damn good game. Perhaps you're just bitter because you decided Bama was shit once they lost to Ole Miss? That was nothing like a Sark game.

Doogles

I don't think Clemson played soft, but I had the thought that Dabo's general heart on the slave antics were Sarkish. He was bitching and whining the whole game. His players believe in him, which is more than I can say for Sark, but there is a lot of sizzle with Dabo.

He would never do better than 7-6 at Washington.

topdawgnc

Two plays saved that game for Bama.

Interception
On side

Clemson matched every score but those two.

Reality. If Bama doesn't do the onside, the game is likely won by Clemson.

Dabo realized that and is why he freaked out.

Clemson got out coached, but was well prepared.

PurpleBaze

Doogles said:

I don't think Clemson played soft, but I had the thought that Dabo's general heart on the slave antics were Sarkish. He was bitching and whining the whole game. His players believe in him, which is more than I can say for Sark, but there is a lot of sizzle with Dabo.

He would never do better than 7-6 at Washington.

I specifically asked for no racist crap!

Doogles

PurpleBaze said:

Doogles said:

I don't think Clemson played soft, but I had the thought that Dabo's general heart on the slave antics were Sarkish. He was bitching and whining the whole game. His players believe in him, which is more than I can say for Sark, but there is a lot of sizzle with Dabo.

He would never do better than 7-6 at Washington.

I specifically asked for no racist crap!

Some things aren't worth editing.

dnc

Doogles said:

I don't think Clemson played soft, but I had the thought that Dabo's general heart on the slave antics were Sarkish. He was bitching and whining the whole game. His players believe in him, which is more than I can say for Sark, but there is a lot of sizzle with Dabo.

He would never do better than 7-6 at Washington.

Surely you don't think Clemson is a job where a 7 win coach at UW can win 13 games?

Dabo might not win a title here but he could win double digits rather easily. He's not a great coach but he doesn't suck.

Dennis_DeYoung

dnc said:

Doogles said:

I don't think Clemson played soft, but I had the thought that Dabo's general heart on the slave antics were Sarkish. He was bitching and whining the whole game. His players believe in him, which is more than I can say for Sark, but there is a lot of sizzle with Dabo.

He would never do better than 7-6 at Washington.

Surely you don't think Clemson is a job where a 7 win coach at UW can win 13 games?

Dabo might not win a title here but he could win double digits rather easily. He's not a great coach but he doesn't suck.

lulz at the idea that Clemson isn't an ACC Washington. The team history is basically exactly the same. They've had ONE natty team ('81) and have gone up/down the rungs of good mediocrity sometimes having runs where they are consistently in the top 25.

I'm not a big Dabo guy, but what he's done is undeniable IMO. He took a program that was being run by a Sark-like guy (Tommy B.) and built this shit into a space where we were in a Natty and are poised to be really fucking good next year.

dnc

Dennis_DeYoung said:

dnc said:

Doogles said:

I don't think Clemson played soft, but I had the thought that Dabo's general heart on the slave antics were Sarkish. He was bitching and whining the whole game. His players believe in him, which is more than I can say for Sark, but there is a lot of sizzle with Dabo.

He would never do better than 7-6 at Washington.

Surely you don't think Clemson is a job where a 7 win coach at UW can win 13 games?

Dabo might not win a title here but he could win double digits rather easily. He's not a great coach but he doesn't suck.

lulz at the idea that Clemson isn't an ACC Washington. The team history is basically exactly the same. They've had ONE natty team ('81) and have gone up/down the rungs of good mediocrity sometimes having runs where they are consistently in the top 25.

I'm not a big Dabo guy, but what he's done is undeniable IMO. He took a program that was being run by a Sark-like guy (Tommy B.) and built this shit into a space where we were in a Natty and are poised to be really fucking good next year.

Exactly. Very similar program profiles.

doogsinparadise

Dennis_DeYoung said:

dnc said:

Doogles said:

I don't think Clemson played soft, but I had the thought that Dabo's general heart on the slave antics were Sarkish. He was bitching and whining the whole game. His players believe in him, which is more than I can say for Sark, but there is a lot of sizzle with Dabo.

He would never do better than 7-6 at Washington.

Surely you don't think Clemson is a job where a 7 win coach at UW can win 13 games?

Dabo might not win a title here but he could win double digits rather easily. He's not a great coach but he doesn't suck.

lulz at the idea that Clemson isn't an ACC Washington. The team history is basically exactly the same. They've had ONE natty team ('81) and have gone up/down the rungs of good mediocrity sometimes having runs where they are consistently in the top 25.

I'm not a big Dabo guy, but what he's done is undeniable IMO. He took a program that was being run by a Sark-like guy (Tommy B.) and built this shit into a space where we were in a Natty and are poised to be really fucking good next year.

We?

RaceBannon

I watched Clemson win their national title in a Pasadena restaurant after watching our DAWGS win the Rose Bowl. That made our DAWGS the pre season #1 for 1982. Then Elway. And the Apple Cup. And I would have fired Don James

So last night would have been a second in a lifetime event.

RoadDawg55

dnc said:

Shades of Sark? Sark hardly ever lost close, when Sark lost he got destroyed. Shades of Peterman maybe.

Clemson played a damn good game. Perhaps you're just bitter because you decided Bama was shit once they lost to Ole Miss? That was nothing like a Sark game.

No, shades of Sark because Dabo was the sole reason Clemson lost. The game reminded me of when Sark lost to Stanford. The sole reason Clemson lost was discipline. If Saban and him switched rosters he would have lost by 21.

Never once in my life said Bama was shit. I've always said they were good. I didn't think Coker could lead them to a title, but he stepped up. Pretty big difference from saying they were shit. I've said Ole Miss is shit because they are.