Music City Bowl forecast: The blues vs. the bluegrass folks

Fellow recruitniks out there – quick, name the most productive college player from Richland Northeast’s vaunted cast of defensive prospects from 3-4 years ago?

Mark Barnes? I thought he’d be a star, but I think I’m correct in saying a recurring shoulder injury hindered him to the point he’s slated to enroll at Florida A&M this spring.

Gary Gray? Still a chance, but the touted corner is best known for getting plowed by Stanford’s Toby the Tank Engine on a 13-yard run this season.

Adam Patterson? He has 1 tackle in five games this year.

Rodney Paulk? Out with a season-ending knee injury, but a decent, serviceable player.

Not to definitively say he is head and shoulders better than, say, Paulk – but at the time, no one would have included hard-hitting safety Calvin Harrison in the conversation.

Harrison, Kentucky’s starting free safety, ranks fourth on a formidable defense with 67 tackles and has three interceptions in this, his final season.

My point: Harrison is one of many examples of why Rich Brooks and staff (most notably, coach-in-waiting/former USC WRs coach/chief recruiter Joker Phillips) have done arguably the top job in the SEC the last five years.

They have 1) done an incredible job of evaluating and luring recruiting afterthoughts to a basketball school, then developing them to couple with 2) attracting a handful of impact players — to give the Wildcats enough depth to compete week in and week out in the SEC.

This Kentucky squad is much more talented than the one that embarrassed a flat Clemson squad in the 2006 Music City Bowl.

CB Trevard Lindley (6-0, 180), returning from injury, is projected an early round NFL pick. DT Corey Peters (6-3, 295) will be a pro, too. WR/wildcat QB Randall Cobb (5-11, 190) could start for most teams. And I wonder how much possum the Kentucky staff is playing with 6-6 junior QB Mike Hartline, who won’t start but figures to play after returning from a four-game absence because of knee injury.

Don’t get me wrong, the Wildcats aren’t world-beaters. But they have much more credibility than they did when last these teams met.

It was no secret in 2006 that Clemson didn’t care to be here.

It had lost its confidence after a Thursday night brow-beating at Virginia Tech, and subsequently lost its Atlantic Division title hopes the week after with a ho-hum, last-minute defeat to middling Maryland (if I had a dollar for every time I’ve used that phrase the past couple of years).

There was internal sentiment that guys like Gaines Adams and C.J. Gaddis had already checked out and were working on their NFL resumes. There were a few reputedly wild-child linemen who made the presence known in late-night social settings. The weather was cold and miserable, and the roughshod high school facilities that welcomed Clemson for practices didn’t exactly frame the bowl trip as a reward, either.

As a general rule – it’s not a positive to be sent northwest for your bowl.

Dabo Swinney contends Clemson is up for this one, mainly because he says this senior class is different. The Tigers have lost three straight bowls and supposedly don’t want their Atlantic Division title year to be stained with three consecutive season-ending losses, including two to middle-of-the-pack SEC squads.

My opinion is there’s a degree of truth there – they will care.

But there’s a discernable difference between caring and being motivated. And I haven’t gotten the sense that this team is all that motivated – or, at least, not motivated enough to overwhelm a formidable Kentucky team playing in front of basically a home crowd.

And truth be told, I don’t think Clemson could be blamed for that. If I played on a team that came within a defensive stop of the ACC title and Orange Bowl, then was relegated to the Music City Bowl, nothing a coach could say could generate a comparable level of enthusiasm. I’d still try and want to win, but a letdown would only be human nature.

If the Tigers prevail, they probably aren’t going to be given much credit because they were supposed to win. I’d argue it would be a feather in Swinney’s cap if they did.

Given the circumstances, I don’t think they do.

PREDICTION: Kentucky 24, Clemson 21

The essence of Spiller

If you’re sick of reading the media Hallmark cards to C.J. Spiller, I’d advise clicking on that left arrow button at the top, left corner of your screen right now.

Actually, this has nothing really to do with Spiller the player, just Spiller the person.

Regardless of whether you think it was the right decision for Spiller to return to Clemson for his senior season, it’s just so rare for players of his caliber to do so when the promise of big NFL money is so sure. And even the few who have taken the same path, I’d argue the pressure was much greater on Spiller to go than, say, a Tim Tebow or Sam Bradford – as, you might recall, Spiller comes from a rather impoverished area, and even his own mother pushed REALLY hard for him to bolt for the NFL.

Wanted to share two anecdotes gleamed from a one-on-one Q&A session we did with Dabo Swinney that is to appear on Saturday’s news front. Swinney had some interesting things to say about what he views as a necessary culture change, the drain of being a head coach and just the state of the program in general. And maybe I’ll get to more of that as the week goes on.

But I was struck by a glossy photo that had been placed on Swinney’s desk over the weekend.

Spiller and Swinney had their picture taken together while attending ESPN’s college football awards show about 10 days ago in Orlando. Spiller was one of three candidates for the Doak Walker Award, given to the nation’s top back.
Anyhow, Spiller took a glossy copy of the photo and wrote a lengthy message on it, saying he didn’t know where to begin to thank Swinney for helping him grow into a man and leader, etc.

At the end, he signed it and included the Bible verse Luke 12:48.

By my copy of the Good Book, the verse reads: “Much will be required of the person entrusted with much, and still more will be demanded of the person entrusted with more.”

That verse, Swinney said, is the essence of Spiller. Entrusted with a platform because of his uncanny skills, Spiller tries to be a role model through his service as well as example for how to act based on your beliefs.

As part of the Q&A, I asked Swinney to recall what happened during the meeting he and Spiller had before Spiller shocked so many by announcing his return last January.

That press conference was a powerful moment to witness – Spiller was clearly drained, to the point he was bound to appear sad regardless of his decision because he was going to be letting someone down. Yet the burst of spontaneous emotion from the 40 or so gathered teammates – let’s just say I hadn’t seen anything like it at the various other major announcement press conferences I’ve attended.

Anyhow, I thought Swinney’s recollection was very insightful and telling:

“Well, he sat down over there in one of my chairs and just started crying. He actually told me he felt he probably was just going to have to go. Probably going to have to go. I just hugged him and told him I couldn’t help him there.

“All I could tell him was, ‘If you want to go pro, that’s what you need to do. But it needs to be what you really want to do. If you don’t have peace about it, you need to think about it and do what was best for you.’ My heart just fell for him because he was really struggling. It was a very difficult day for him, and I didn’t know what he was going to do.

“He just sat there with his head down for a few minutes, then he wiped his eyes and said, ‘All right, let’s go, coach.’ So we got up, he walked to the podium, I went to the back of the room and I really thought he was leaving. I had no idea.

“To see him not only announce he was staying but also the things he said and the way he said them, I was in awe.”

Spiller backed up the story, saying: “I just went in there and told him I felt I had pressure on me. He’s a very faithful guy, so we talked about letting the Lord give you guidance. After he said, I felt some peace come to me. And God guided me in the right path.”

To think that minutes before that press conference began, he had figured to announce a decision to go the NFL – if for no other reason to appease those closest to him. His ultimate choice took guts I’m not sure many folks would have in a similar situation.

****

Few other quick notes, in case this is it for blog entries until the weekend prediction forecast …

As you know, junior S DeAndre McDaniel’s return probably hinges on his NFL draft projection, regardless of what he’s saying publicly.

Junior DT Jarvis Jenkins also solicited an evaluation from the NFL’s underclassmen advisory committee, and I’ve been told by multiple sources that LT Chris Hairston did as well – although Hairston genuinely didn’t think he did, and if he did, he said there’s no way he doesn’t come back. I take Hairston for his word in the latter regard.

Jenkins, rated among the top five junior defensive tackles by Mel Kiper, stands much more reason to be swayed than Hairston because of his superior pro potential. But he maintains he only wants to get an NFL critique and has concrete plans to stay and graduate.

“I just want to see what they say about me, what I need to improve on, have something to think about going into next year,” he said.

Redshirting freshman Brandon Thomas had been pegged as the left tackle in the future for various reasons. Very agile, quick feet, and perhaps because the last few recruiting classes have lacked a long-armed, 6-6 talent who fits the prototype.

But with Mason Cloy out for the spring with a broken fibula, Thomas is going to be given every chance to win the (sans Cloy) first-string left guard spot coming out of the spring.

Sounds like Thomas could be to the left side what David Smith was to the right side there for a while. The staff has liked what it’s seen from Thomas during their “JV” sessions at the end of bowl practices.

We’ll see Sunday if Clemson cares about facing Kentucky in the Music City Bowl. Swinney insists the team is “dialed in,” although I have my doubts.

One thing’s for sure – the media corps covering the Tigers is overlooking the Wildcats, myself at the top of the list.

Beyond a token inquiry about Kentucky’s use of the “wildcat,” I’d dare say there has hardly been another question about the opponent.

Kentucky is a quality club, mind you. But after the ACC title game defeat, it’s hard to find much significance or relevance to this contest. Hence the majority of stories from numerous outlets are already touching on “the future” at various positions.

If Swinney can get his bunch motivated for this one, then there is little room to question his claims the team has learned to play with consistently high effort every game – what he describes as probably the biggest challenge he inherited upon taking over the program.

Hope everyone has a Merry Christmas!

Steele on the process, progress and Istanbul

Had planned to roll out some recruiting and Shrine Bowl-related thoughts today, then defensive coordinator Kevin Steele had to go and wax philosophical with a few of us reporters Thursday afternoon.

Considering it’s the first time Steele has spoken since the ACC championship defeat, interest in that would trump my evaluation of perhaps the weakest class of South Carolina recruits I’ve seen in some time.

The transcript of Steele’s interview:

Q: After the ACC championship, you said you thought the defense kind of lost its edge. Looking back, what do you think now?

A: Well, you know, you can’t throw the baby out with the bath water. In this country, we’ll do that in a hurry.

If you look at the whole body of work, we played 11 games in which we had a drive here or there where maybe we lost our edge a little bit. But in its entirety, these guys put together a lot of good things. 34, 35 sacks. 24 interceptions. I think they ranked 22nd in defense in the country. These guys did a lot of things very, very good.

But we go to the last two games, we were really ineffective creating situations where we could get off the field. You could say look at rush yards per game, but that’s a little bit of a misnomer. You play Georgia Tech twice, obviously the number of rushes and yards is going to be higher. You look more at the rushing yardage per carry. It’s right on the edge where it creates second-and-4 instead of second-and-7. And then it creates third-and-1 instead of third-and-5.

And that’s where we lost the edge. What it does is that creates an emotional drain on you. You go out there and are fighting, you’re not playing terrible, but you’re ineffective. And that’s an emotional drain.

But it’s not something we don’t know what it is, and it’s not something we can’t correct. We just have to get back in there and regroup.

And in the first year of the process, we made a lot of progress, then we kind of started treading water at best. In fact, ducked our head under a couple of times.

So you have to look at it in its totality when you’re evaluating it and recognize the fact when we’re talking to them as coaches that hey, all these good things you made progress on. But we have to recapture that emotional edge, if you will.

Not so much emotional, that’s not a good word. I really think just that psychological edge.

Q: Dabo had mentioned that if certain guys didn’t play better, you’d look at some personnel changes. Was that to light a fire?

A: That’s every week. In my opinion, that’s what I think (Swinney) meant. We’re going to play the best guys and we’re going to play the most effective guys. You’re always trying to create competition, and that comes sometimes without people even noticing or it being said.

You go into a game and, for a hypothetical, you have a defensive tackle who starts the game. You put another guy in and he plays really well. Well, end of the game, he had 40 snaps and the other guy had 20 snaps, but in everybody’s mind, the other guy was the starter, and it goes unnoticed.

So yeah, we’re trying to create as much competition as we can. You have more time to do that when you have a break between. The window affords us an opportunity to create competition.

Q: You referenced an emotional drain. Is that what happened on the last Georgia Tech drive?

A: No, no. Don’t get specific. I’m talking about the body of work. We went from talking about the body of work to one specific drive. You can’t do that.

That’s an issue where you say, did all that stuff I talked about factor in? Yeah, it factored in. But there’s technical issues where, for example, they were really good at the veer scheme into the boundary – which we’d seen on tape and worked a lot – and then the loop scheme with the tackle looping outside (to block). So two blocking schemes with the tackle they had majored in. Obviously they still have the arc load, meaning what is that wing back doing and what is that wide receiver game.

This is why this offense is so good. … Well, we get in the game, and they’re pretty smart guys. They gave us the loop look for the first two steps, then created the veer. So that’s a totally different thing. It got us discombobulated. Well, by the time we got over there and got it fixed, what it’s done is made them question the picture of what they’re seeing. So they got unsure and a little hesitant.

We tried to fix it with some things – a couple of them worked, a couple of them didn’t – and all in all, what happened was we got out of sync. And what we adjusted with to help them settle down, some of it worked, some of them didn’t. That’s the technical part.

(Note: To clarify the schematic wrinkle Steele says Georgia Tech invoked — what essentially happened was that with the veer look, the defensive end stayed inside and the weakside linebacker was charged with taking the pitchman. But when the tackle looped outside, the defensive end and linebacker were to trade responsibilities and had to recognize that on the fly.

So when the tackle took two steps out, then reversed course to take the linebacker, it created confusion as to which defender was assigned whom. To counteract it, Clemson tried stunting with the line and linebackers, which was a higher-risk, higher-reward proposition against the option.)

The psychological part is we’d already been in that psychological bubble where were not getting off the field. Things that shock you that you don’t even think about – they rushed for more yards per carry the first game we played them and had eight three and outs.

You have to evaluate the total body of work when you’re an evaluator. And the truth is these guys did some outstanding things. People are very quick to judge these players. I’m not talking about coaches; we’re free game. And they forget about the Wake Forest game. They forget about 54 yards against Boston College. They forget about 14 points, one touchdown against TCU. That gets thrown over there in the boat, and those players get judged by the last eight quarters.

Now, that’s the net world we live in. But that’s not realistic when we’re evaluating what these players have done. Now, if you want to evaluate coaches by a different standard, have at it. Go have a blast.

Q: How do you get that psychological edge back?

A: You can show them on film and just regain that through repetition out here. You can obviously rekindle it. This isn’t the first time it’s been done. There’s been teams that have won national championships … I remember Tim Tebow saying this will never happen again. He was right until two weeks ago. It happens.

Q: Is this group pretty resilient, or some more than others?

A: You have to look at it like this: Are people frustrated and upset, meaning us internally, not externally, that we didn’t finish the way we could have finished? Well, you don’t evaluate emotion. You evaluate it technically, because emotion will get you nowhere.

This is not a hard thing to do. We are in the first year of the process. And fortunately for me, I went through this two years ago (at Alabama). So I’ve been through this recently, where those guys, you could see the process taking hold. Even though the product wasn’t where you wanted it at that particular moment, because everybody wants to win every single game. But you saw the process, so you could build on the process.

This isn’t the 10th year of the deal. If this was the 10th year and that happens, mmm, it will be (a problem). But this is the first year of the process. And we were brought here to build a program that can sustain itself through leadership, work habits, fundamentals, technique and all that.

I’d like to tell you we can get that done in 11 months, but obviously, we didn’t. So you just keep chopping wood until you do. You don’t panic and throw the baby out with the bath water.

There’s a laundry list of things these kids accomplished this year that’s kind of remarkable. But there’s a lot of teachable moments in it that will help us down the road in year two, year three, year four of the program.

I probably shouldn’t say this. I’m probably going to get a call about this. But I’ll tell you this: I don’t think it’s fair to this program to evaluate (now) because there’s people here who were here (on the staff). This is a new staff. This is a new program. We’re 11 months into it, you know. Now, we have a long way to go, and we’re not happy because we didn’t finish it the way we needed to finish it. But I’ll ask you this – too much success too quick sometimes is worse than a wake-up call. Because then they think it’s magical dust.

Q: Not sure how to transition from that, but what do you think of Kentucky’s offense?

A: I’ll go back and help you transition. How long has this staff been here?

Q: 11 months.

A: What were we charged to do?

Q: Get the program over the top.

A: If you would have gone and hired Coach A from Istanbul and he’d have gone to the championship game the first year, how would it have been evaluated?

Q: Probably pretty good.

A: Thank you. You just translated. I’ll probably hear about that one later.

Q: What kind of criticism are you talking about?

A: No, no, no, just the whole mindset. Because we’re all a family. This program is not a player, a coach. It’s the mindset of hey, let’s stay positive in this thing and keep climbing the mountain.

We’re just in base camp. We hadn’t reached the pinnacle by any stretch of the imagination. That’s what I’m saying.
And not in defense of a coach. Coach is a free game. My point is, I’m doing it to make sure when you’re asking me evaluation questions, the focus always goes on what you did right then. And that’s fine.

But don’t forget, we’re at the end of the season. Let’s evaluate the whole body of work, because that’s what those players deserve.

Q: Was there too much success too early?

A: There ain’t never too much success too early (Steele smiles). Now translate that from what I said awhile ago.

Q: Do you expect to see a lot of Wildcat?

A: I expect to see a lot of that. We absolutely, unequivocally know what our problems were out of that. So we have repped extensively a little simpler application, if you will.

They’ve been in it 87 snaps the last four games. Pretty good percentage.

18 (Randall Cobb) is going to get the ball some way. They’re either going to snap it to him, hand it to him or throw it to him.

They’re actually more (schematically) like Arkansas was with Felix (Jones) and (Darren) McFadden. They have 20 running across being Felix and 18 is McFadden.

Q: After 13 games, how would you assess how Brandon Maye has been as the defense’s quarterback?

A: He’s made progress. He has a hard job, and he’s made progress. He’s an emotional guy, which is a positive in one sense. I think he’s learning more and more each game how to play the next play.

Q: One would think this developmental period would be big for Corico Hawkins and Jonathan Willard, given their expected roles next season?

A: Those two guys are very instinctive and are very good tacklers, both in space and in the box. And they also pack a punch if you will. They have the ability to make close-proximity big hits. Instincts and that, you can’t teach.

Q: How much do you look ahead to next season?

A: I could give you the politically correct answer, and I could give you the real answer. The real answer is, we have to finish this thing, this year. We owe that to this team, the seniors, everybody. So you have to live in that capsule, and it’s just the next game.

But because you’re afforded more practice time and with the game so far away, you can take some periods in practice and try some things that really won’t serve you in the game but will later on.

Q: What, then, is the politically correct answer?

A: The politically correct answer is, no, no, no, we have not been successful the last two games. Had 11 games where the body of work was really good. The last two weren’t. We have to recapture that, so all our focus is on that and finishing this thing off.

What I’m trying to convey, I’m trying to paint the picture of what these guys did in a full body of work. The positive things they did.

The negatives are obvious. Look at the scoreboard; we didn’t win.

Q: Are you doing it because they feel they’re being criticized?

A: No. I’m doing it because the totality of an environment of the program is key. I’ll give you an example. Everybody that touches everything has to be pulling in the same direction, especially early in the process. Here’s why: If you’re not careful, you walk into a home visit, and you’re handed things to explain that, well, who said it? I don’t know. This is just print. It’s not the voice.

Q: Who coaches in Istanbul?

A: (Laughs) I may be if we don’t get this thing turned around.

Special day for Spiller

The applause for RB C.J. Spiller figures to be boisterous today, the line for autographs afterward lengthy.

Only the venue will be Littlejohn Coliseum, not Memorial Stadium. And folks will probably be asking for their commencement program to be signed, not a football.

Spiller is one of six Clemson football players given practice off today because they are officially graduating late this (Thursday) morning. Others include WR Jacoby Ford, LB Kavell Conner, reserve OLs Jamarcus Grant and Cory Lambert and walk-on RB Ronald Watson. But it should be noted Spiller is graduating in 3 1/2 years.

It has to be a rewarding feeling for Spiller, who will become the first person on either side of his family – mother’s or father’s – to receive a college diploma.

His mother, Patricia Watkins, arrived from Lake Butler, Fla., on Wednesday night, along with Spiller’s older brother and younger sister. His once distant father, Clifford Sr., is supposed to travel in from Miami.

Plus 10-15 members of Spiller’s church, Victory Christian Center – hence the “VCC” Spiller has worn on his eye black throughout his career – are slated to attend.

What’s rather unique, if not poignant, is not even his family thought Spiller would get his degree, at least this soon – coming out of high school, and as late as last January, they still presumed he would follow his dream and bolt early for the NFL after his junior season.

If you’re interested, we’ll have a story setting the scene from Spiller’s graduation celebration in Friday’s paper.

McDaniel: Likely to return with a 2nd-round grade

A quick update on the near futures of the Clemson underclassmen eligible for the NFL Draft – namely junior safety DeAndre McDaniel.

McDaniel told me Tuesday he is “leaning” toward returning if he receives a second-round projection from the NFL’s underclassmen advisory committee.

“A first round grade, it would probably be crazy for me not to go (pro),” McDaniel said. “But second round or anything else, I’m probably coming back.”

I’ve heard a number of players filled out the paperwork to receive a projection – including McDaniel, junior left tackle Chris Hairston and junior defensive tackle Jarvis Jenkins.

Players are expected to hear back from the committee in about two weeks. The deadline for underclassmen to declare for the April draft is Jan. 15.

McDaniel, though, is the only one who’s believed to be giving any real consideration toward leaving. But from what I’ve been told, all signs indeed currently point to his return.

McDaniel said he would almost have to turn pro if given a first-round grade, but that scenario appears unlikely.

A second-round grade is much more feasible, if not realistic. But the sense I got is McDaniel thinks he can do as Tennessee safety Eric Berry did this past season – let his increased profile boost his NFL stock.

Berry’s play arguably wasn’t any better this year than last, but in putting himself on the map last season, he carried a substantially higher profile into the season. Thus he has been considered a top-10 lock throughout the year when his potential is no greater than a year ago, when he was at best a mid- to late-1^st-rounder.

These situations are always subject to change, because there’s no predicting who or what could influence McDaniel or his family the next month.

10 things return manifesto

1. Ah, ‘tis the season for mock NFL drafts to start surfacing now that the rough order of the draft is taking shape.

Because they’ll be in Nashville prepping for the Dec. 27 Music City Bowl, C.J. Spiller and his teammates are scheduled to spend Christmas night at LP Field watching the Tennessee Titans play the San Diego Chargers.

While there, Spiller should thank Titans RB Chris Johnson for contributing to the gift that figures to keep on giving to the Spiller family for years to come.

Johnson headlines a fleet of young running backs who have defied the traditional NFL mold, arguably increasing Spiller’s value in the forthcoming draft.

Used to be that NFL teams placed its premium on the conventional I-formation back, 5-10, 225 pounds minimum, who could handle the feature load and a steady dose of between-the-tackles running (see Alabama’s Mark Ingram).

With the college game having transformed into variations of the shotgun spread offense, the NFL has slowly adjusted or been forced to adjust. And in the increasingly specialized pro game, the trend has been to forge a two-back system with a home run threat to complement the inside runner.

Thus speedsters such as Johnson, Felix Jones, Darren McFadden, Jamaal Charles and Jerious Norwood have all been early round picks, arguably valued much greater than they would have been a decade ago (unless, of course, Oakland is making the pick).

Spiller projects as the top running back available in April’s draft and a probable first-round pick. And he stands to benefit most financially from the successes of Johnson, who has proven more durable and more versatile than the assigned stereotype.

His success, in my opinion, hinges on which team selects Spiller. And I maintain the lower he goes in the first round, the better.

Spiller would bring immense value to an offense already featuring a cast of playmakers. For example, plug him in at New England, which has two 1st-rounders courtesy of a theft from the Raiders. Give him 10-15 carries per game as well as a role in the Pats’ screen passing game, and that offense becomes even more dynamic.

New Orleans is thought to have consider trading or cutting Reggie Bush this offseason because he’s going to count at least $13.5 million against the Saints’ cap next year, more than 10 percent of its space; there’s another system that would accentuate Spiller’s talents. Speaking of that Christmas game – how about Spiller as the replacement for LaDanian Tomlinson?

On the flip side, it doesn’t do running backs (who have a shorter shelf life anyhow) any favors to be chosen by a sorry team.

Imagine the karma of Spiller going to Cleveland, where he could be reunited with James Davis as the “Thunder & Lightning” behind an offensive line as big a natural disaster as Clemson’s was a year ago.

Seattle looks like a prime candidate for a team looking for explosive splash at running back, and that franchise has gone down the drain through a rash of horrid personnel decisions.

He’d just better hope no Bucs big wigs were on hand for his career-best performance in Tampa Bay’s stadium during the ACC championship.

2. Forget for a moment whether you believe Spiller was worthy of a Heisman Trophy invite.

I’d love to know the company line for why Florida QB Tim Tebow received a formal invite as a player (and not a past winner) when Spiller did not.

According to Heisman rules, the accounting firm that handles tabulation – Deloitte – determines the “natural break” in the voting numbers and sets the finalists accordingly. Only rule is, there can be no fewer than three and no more than six.

The top three in the closest race in Heisman history were Alabama RB Mark Ingram (1,304), Stanford RB Toby Gerhart (1,276) and Texas QB Colt McCoy (1,145).

Next highest was Nebraska DT Ndamukong Suh (815). There’s a definite gap between third and fourth, but Suh had enough votes to merit inclusion, to be sure.

Then came Tebow (390), without even half of Suh’s votes, followed by Spiller (223) and Boise State QB Kellen Moore (100).

You could even justify Tebow’s inclusion if invites were admittedly extended on a subjective basis. But the rules state it’s based on statistical analysis.

Tebow was going on the Heisman’s dime anyhow. But it’s interesting how they subverted the process to do so.

3. Amazing fact: Spiller was the first ACC player to finish in the top six of the Heisman race since 2000 when Florida State quarterback Chris Weinke won the award.

That’s not going to be in the ACC’s sales pitch as it negotiates in next TV contract.

On the flip side, we’re bound to hear over the next couple of months how the ACC has produced among the highest number of NFL draft picks over the last handful of years, right there with the SEC.

So, what does the stat suggest?

The ACC has really suffered from offensive impotency this decade, stemming from poor quarterback play/recruitment/development?

The league hasn’t produced a bona fide national title contender, thus preventing a best player-on-best team candidate to emerge?

Or, like the Big East, the national perception of the ACC is so poor that its players suffer credibility-wise as a result?

Quick estimation: D) All of the above.

4. “It’s the most wonderful time … of the year!”

Yes, Andy Williams’ Christmas classic has been ruined by ESPN associating it with a promo for thrilling postseason contests like the San Diego Credit Union or Little Caesars bowls (does a place offering $5 pizza crusts with a shred of cheese really stand to benefit from the exposure?)

But this week in particular has been near and dear to a recruitnik’s heart in recent years.

It’s Shrine Bowl week.

Unfortunately, it’s no longer feasible for me to be at each and every practice scouting most of the highest-profile recruits from North and South Carolina. And the event has lost some luster because there’s no longer the social networking element, as the NCAA now bans major college coaches from attending to evaluate (and job hunt).

But I’m hoping to squeeze in a practice somewhere between my Clemson responsibilities this week, if for no other reason than to have a better feel for what the Tigers’ commitments and recruiting targets bring to the table, for better and worse.

Always fascinated how some player rises from obscurity to net major offers, when it’s not as if college teams haven’t scouted him thoroughly before. Makes you wonder how the careers of guys like FSU’s Dekoda Watson, Clemson LT Chris Hairston and Georgia Tech linebacker Sedric Griffin would have turned out without this showcase. Of course, for every Hairston, there’s a Jamal Medlin.

Do a monthly state of South Carolina recruiting piece for the ACC Sports Journal, and this month, I put together a Shrine Bowl primer with evaluations from two analysts and friends – Ryan Bartow of TigerIllustrated.com and Miller Safrit of Scout.com.

Spoiler alert – three guys they both listed as under-the-radar South Carolina players who could make names for themselves this week: Pageland Central TE Keagan Funderburk (sign and place with Michigan, Wisconsin offers), Chester C R.J. Canty and Dorman OL Andrew Bailey (Liberty commit).

5. When we media folks last spoke with Dabo Swinney last week, he stoked the fires a tad by declaring some personnel changes could be in order if a few defensive players maintained their recent level of performances.

“We’ve got a couple of guys not playing well at all, it’s real simple,” Swinney said. “I think we’ve got to challenge them or put somebody else in there.”

Swinney declined to cite specific positions or names, but it seems fair to extrapolate that one of those spots is linebacker.

Brandon Maye did not play well at middle linebacker down the stretch, and I’d be curious to know coaches’ truthful take on the play of weakside LB Kavell Conner, who appears steady and reliable but limited in terms of range.

By and large, I took Swinney’s words as primarily a lighter under Maye’s rear that he must play with more focus, win more physical battles and eliminate the costly penalties fueled by his explosive temperament.

That said, it’s going to be interesting to see how much the defensive staff uses the next two weeks – bowl game included – to expedite the development of the backups, freshman middle backer Corico Hawkins and redshirt freshman “Will” Jonathan Willard.

Steele has generally worked in systems that favor thick, stout inside backers who can support the run first and foremost. And if Maye (6-2, 235) continues to be washed out of plays, at what point does Hawkins (around 5-10 at best, 230-plus pounds) get his chance to show what he can do?

For that matter, Willard continues to impress me with his activity in limited action. And note that he received 13 snaps in the ACC title game – more than double what he’d tallied the previous six games (6).

In terms of body types, I actually think they are better fits at the other’s position – Hawkins at will, Willard at mike. So I imagine it’s within the realm of possibility that option could be looked at in the spring as well. But the sense I get is that Hawkins is a good bit better at being the defensive “play-caller” for Steele – checking the defense into a call based on formations, etc.

Either way, will be interesting to watch how their interior linebacker rotation takes shape through the spring.

6. Here’s betting plenty of Clemson fans will find a rooting interest for wherever QB Willy Korn transfers, and deservedly so.

An interesting element to the “where” decision is “when.”

Gardner-Webb, for example, is a locale I threw out a few months ago as a potential destination with some legs to it.

But I’d argue that Korn could call G-Webb coaches now or in June, and they’d still take him because the various benefits he could offer that program.

Don’t know how close Korn is to making a call, but I’m told he “has put out a lot of hooks” and is keeping his options open.

A smart approach for someone who is itching to prove he can be a winner at the FBS level. You never know what programs are going to be intrigued in an immediate fix at quarterback after semester grades come out or recruiting shakes out.

If he’s not going to arrive until the summer, it only makes sense to wait before committing somewhere.

7. On one hand, I look at Clemson’s recruiting class (20 commitments, all but five deemed three stars or lower by Rivals.com) and wonder whether two consecutive “meh” classes will catch up to Swinney before his tenure is over.

At a minimum, it lacks the apparent difference makers such as Spiller, JD, Da’Quan Bowers and Ricky Sapp – the types of high-ceiling talents that gave Clemson its presumed edge this year.

On the other hand, if the Tigers fend off the wolves to retain all their current commits, it still looks better on paper than the 2004 haul that had so many lower-rated players turn out to be quality starters (Mike Hamlin, Chris Clemons, Dorell Scott, Aaron Kelly, Rashaad Jackson, Cullen Harper, Barry Richardson, Phillip Merling before prep school – none given more than three stars).

8. In the preseason, I believed the biggest reason Clemson’s defense would improve had to do with schematic psychology.

Always thought former coordinator Vic Koenning was never given enough credit for his product because it lacked machismo. That said, I believed its fatal flaw was promoting a “play not to lose” mentality that invariably led to the defense buckling and the opponent mounting a game-winning fourth quarter drive.

Kevin Steele came in and instituted the man coverage and pressure packages that had the defense playing to win.

Well, after giving up fourth-quarter leads to Georgia Tech (twice), TCU and Miami, maybe I need to rethink that theory.

Given Steele’s disregard for punching his hand into solid objects, maybe I should keep future theories to myself.

9. Not going to put words into Clemson players’ mouths and contend they don’t care about the Music City Bowl, because maybe they will play inspired for any number of reasons.

But the ticket sales, as expected, confirm the event is perceived as scant more than a token parting gift for a season that climaxed with the ACC title game.

Clemson has sold 4,000 tickets. Kentucky – almost 16,000, four times more. And that’s not counting the nearly roughly 4,000 that were scooped up from the bowl when news broke the Wildcats were the likely SEC selection.

Which isn’t to say I disagree with the relative apathy. If I’d paid to take the fam to Tampa for the ACC championship, doubt I’m going to fork over however many hundreds it would take to inconveniently hustle to Nashville the day after Christmas, especially when most people would have to take a vacation day because they are scheduled to be back to work the morning after the 8:30 p.m. game.

Watching it for free from the confines of my sofa with an endless supply of buffalo wing dip would indeed be the more attractive option.

10. On sheer principle, I thought about rooting for Clemson to reach the Orange Bowl so I would watch it in person – instead of being subjected to one more Fox college football telecast.

It’s not possible to cast worse announcers or have a lower production quality – perhaps understandable given the money/Guam’s GNP that Fox shelled out for BCS broadcast rights, thus influencing NCAA presidents to chirp something about academics whenever the word “playoffs” is brought up.

Which makes me all the more leery of banter about the ACC and the Pac-10 apparently negotiating with Fox about packaging its football and basketball rights into a mega-deal that would – as best as hoped – slightly marginalize ESPN’s sugar daddy deal with the SEC (OK, not really).

What do you think – would the increased revenue help the league more than it would hurt to lose the ESPN audience?

Willy or won’t he go to a major program?

After the Coastal Carolina game, wrote a follow column suggesting the question wasn’t if Willy Korn would transfer, but when.

After the semester, to get a jump on learning the offense of the system in which he would presumably start? Or after the spring semester, which would allow him to graduate with a communications studies degree in basically 3.5 years?

We received that answer Wednesday when Clemson announced Korn would hang around through the spring before exiting.

Next question: Where does he go?

I firmly believe Korn delayed his departure because completing his graduation here means something to him. He turned into a Clemson fan when started attending games with his dad and brothers before high school, and he has a ton of friends among his classmates.

But one of the benefits of sticking it out is that Korn would also have the chance to transfer to a Football Bowl Subdivision school and not sit out the standard year mandated by NCAA rules.

The redshirt sophomore has two years of eligibility remaining. With diploma in hand, Korn could apply for an NCAA waiver to play immediately if, for example, he goes to a school that has a master’s program Clemson does not.

Having that waiver granted is no guarantee. But if Greg Paulus was granted immediate eligibility at Syracuse under this provision, I don’t see any reason Korn wouldn’t.

More pertinently, though – is there a major program out there willing to unequivocally bring Korn in to be its 2010 starter?

In my somewhat educated opinion, one big criteria in Korn’s decision-making process will be school proximity. I don’t get the sense Korn will want to stray too far from home. So that in and of itself would limit the scope of choices.

Then, of course, there’s the matter of finding programs that believe Korn can be successful in their system.

A broken collarbone as a freshman and a frayed labrum as a redshirt freshman clearly took their toll. Korn overhauled his mechanics after spring practice and is now one year removed from surgery.

At the FBS level, there aren’t many schools that jump out as having a starting vacancy and being close to here.

Only one comes to mind – Middle Tennessee, which is loaded with Clemson coaching connections and loses its starting quarterback, Dwight Dasher. (Correction, one day too late — Dasher is a junior. I went braindead somewhere in the research process, obviously!)

Odds would seem to favor Korn landing at the Football Championship Subdivision level, and perhaps he still does.

The school I’ve heard through the rumor grapevine the last two months has been Gardner-Webb, perhaps the most convenient fit in terms of both location, style and need. But from what I’ve gathered, that’s by no means a done deal yet, as Korn begins to collect and sift through his options.

The one I’m not expecting him to pursue – and maybe incorrectly so – is the obvious candidate, Appalachian State.

The Mountaineers are as high-profile as they come at the FCS level, they run a timing-based spread awfully similar to what Korn ran at Byrnes High, Armanti Edwards is graduating and there are ties that could be tapped into. Korn’s prep predecessor and friend, Trey Elder, was both a starter and backup quarterback at Appalachian State, and Elder’s brother (and former Korn target, as well as friend), Blake, is currently on the Mountaineers’ roster.

So to say Appalachian State is familiar with Korn’s situation would probably be an understatement.

Yet the variable is whether Korn could beat out Edwards’ backup, rising junior Travaris Cadet – who turned coaches’ heads with imposing rushing performances in several outings this season.

My gut says that if Korn were headed to Appalachian State, this match would already have been made, and Korn would have felt compelled to be there for spring practice. But that’s just my feeling.

Regardless of destination, you won’t find many folks who played with, coached or covered him who aren’t hoping he finds success. His work ethic earned a lot of respect in Clemson’s locker room, and he’s an affable, engaging personality.

My Heisman vote

Plenty of dead time this week to get to the list of 10 things following the ACC title, so why not delve into the most timely ongoing debate:

The Heisman Trophy.

Filled out my ballot Sunday, and I went back and forth debating 1 vs. 2, finally settling on:

• 1 DT Ndamukong Suh, Sr., Nebraska
• 2 RB/KR/PR C.J. Spiller, Sr., Clemson
• 3 WR/KR Mardy Gilyard, Sr., Cincinnati

Team success certainly factored into my equation, but I consider the Heisman more than a vote for the best player on the best team. And stats aren’t nearly as important as impact.

After watching Suh treat Clemson’s line like rag dolls in last year’s Gator Bowl, he was on my radar from the get-go this season. Suh was the most dominating individual in college football on a weekly basis, and you don’t often find interior linemen with that dual blend of pass-rushing and run-stuffing aptitude.

It is hard to know how my position as Clemson beat reporter affected judgment of Spiller.

On the one hand, witnessing his direct or indirect impact on each offensive or special teams play probably gave me a increased appreciation for his talents and value.

On the other hand, I was probably more inclined to factor in his campaign’s warts, such as his penchant for sitting out large or key stretches in the big games.

No other offensive player in the nation commanded more schematic attention, nor did anyone else supply as many momentous or dynamic moments.

But the consistency factor gave Suh the nod.

Don’t know why Gilyard didn’t receive more attention nationally – sure, some degree of his statistical receiving success is a product of Cincinnati’s prolific offensive system, shouldn’t the same be said for the other offensive finalists beyond perhaps Toby Gerhart?

Gilyard was a terror on single man coverage, and he was also a frequent game-changer in the return game.

A few explanations on some other candidates considered:

QB Andy Dalton, Jr., TCU – Without having seen him before, I figured he’s be TCU’s weak link going into the Clemson game. Kept reading about his high completion percentage and had visions of a Rob Spence system quarterback.

Boy, was I wrong.

Dalton may not possess the premium NFL tools of a Mallett/Clausen or carry the name recognition of Tebow/McCoy, but he was the best quarterback I’ve seen all season in terms of accuracy, decision-making and playmaking, and that’s having scrutinized the Horned Frogs on several occasions since the Clemson contest.

Can’t come to grips with whether I had Dalton too high … or too low.

RB Mark Ingram, So., Alabama – Truth be told, I believe he’s a better conventional NFL prospect than Spiller. Balance, vision, strength, durability, sufficient speed and burst – looks like Emmitt Smith, right down to the No. 22.

And that’s what you want, especially in the pros, where two-thirds of the teams want your standard I-formation back. (Which is to say I think Spiller’s NFL success is more dependent than most on which team drafts him. He can make a good team great – hey, New Orleans is thought to be prepared to release Reggie Bush this offseason – but if you ask Spiller to carry the load for, say, Cleveland, not sure he can thrive under the anticipated pounding).

But I couldn’t in good conscience vote for a player I don’t even believe to be in the top 3 or 4 in the MVP race on his own team. The Crimson Tide’s success begins with a stout defense, then trickles to a punishing rushing approach.

Put Ingram behind Clemson’s O-line and he wouldn’t be nearly as productive. Couldn’t predict the same if you put Spiller in Alabama’s offense.

QB Tim Tebow, Sr., Florida – You can’t place too much emphasis on quality leadership, and despite his lower numbers, don’t think you can argue against his value to that team’s successes.

In his case alone, I admittedly put too much weight on the Gators’ SEC title loss.

Didn’t help that every time I think of Tebow, I hear Tom Rinaldi rattling off one-word sentences in a sappy background voice-over. “Faith. Perseverance. Fortitude. Desire. Blah. Blah-blah. Blah-blah. Love. To listen to. My own voice.” 

QB Colt McCoy, Sr., Texas – A sentimental consideration, but only because he deserved the award more than Oklahoma’s Sam Bradford last year. And McCoy’s a likeable guy.

The public case against Dalton would be “Well, who did they really play?” I think you can make that argument against almost anyone but Ingram. And especially so with McCoy.

McCoy had some standout games, but from everything I’ve read and heard by those who follow Texas closely, he’s not really had a good year. His is more a career achievement candidacy riding the coattails of the Longhorns’ unbeaten record.

RB Toby Gerhart, Sr., Stanford – “Toby the Tank” is entertaining to watch. He’s the consummate overachiever, a stocky guy whose sum is greater than his specific skills. Runs with power and understated shiftiness.

But his candidacy is largely founded on big games against Southern Cal and Notre Dame – which probably cemented the votes of Beano Cook and Lou Holtz, but shouldn’t enhance his profile to anyone who has paid attention to how porous those defenses have been this year. No one seems to mention Gerhart’s pedestrian numbers vs. Wake Forest earlier this year.

Proof that timing and perception are everything in the Heisman chase.

ACC title forecast: No “Good Vibrations”

The last time Clemson won an ACC title, the No. 1 song on the Billboard charts was … Prince’s “Cream.”

The next week, it was Michael Bolton’s “When a Man Loves a Woman.”

These were the glory days Clemson fans remember for gusto and testosterone?

Can only imagine Death Valley was rocking before kickoffs in 1991 to Color Me Badd, C+C Music Factory and Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch (otherwise known as my iPod collection).

Sometimes the good ol’ days really weren’t as good as we remember think or surmise they were.

In retracing the lineage of the ’91 titlists for a Saturday story, I’ve been struck by how the dynamics of that triumph so differ from what this Clemson team would be experiencing.

Levon Kirkland said they gave coach Ken Hatfield a Gatorade bath, but there was scant additional celebration – considering the ’86, ‘87 and ’88 titles, the Tigers were expected to win the ACC in those days. Winning the title in anticipated fashion was more of a relief, especially after the drama that had unfolded with Danny Ford’s departure in 1989.

Clemson actually clinched in the season’s ninth game, then went on to beat USC and then Duke in Tokyo before getting hammered by California in the Citrus Bowl – perhaps the beginning the of the end for Ken Hatfield.

By the same token, the potential similarities are also worth noting for the context. Hatfield had seemingly righted the ship in his second year (and yes, we’re through 1.5 seasons of the Dabo Swinney tenure). And Brentson Buckner said that new defensive coordinator Kevin Steele largely has this unit showing the same style of aggressiveness and machismo characteristic of that stud-studded ’91 defensive front seven (Buckner, Kirkland, Ed McDaniel, Wayne Simmons – today’s Alabama D has nothing on those boys).

Ah, but that’s the past, which has no true effect on Saturday’s ACC championship.

For that matter, I’m also inclined to believe that Clemson’s showing in its 30-27 loss at Georgia Tech on Sept. 10 will not have the effect some folks think it will.

A matter of opinion, to be sure, but there seems to be the perception that the Tigers’ strong second-half performance against Georgia Tech’s option will probably simply just carry over to this contest. And Kyle Parker & Co. will pick up where it left off shredding the Tech secondary when the Tigers went into hurry-up and desperation mode.

I look at how DE Da’Quan Bowers and DT Jarvis Jenkins were men among boys against Ga. Tech’s front that game – and see the current Bowers still recovering from torn knee ligaments, and Jenkins not playing half as well as he did early in the year.

I look at how disciplined the Tigers’ defense was for all but about 4-5 snaps of the Georgia Tech game. And I see the current group making the same kind of mistakes week in and week out against a package of quarterback zone reads and basic wildcat runs.

Not to mention poor fits by the linebackers and the hit-or-miss proposition of the prospective tacklers in the secondary.

Furthermore, there was no reason the first time Clemson shouldn’t have mauled a GT defense that surrounded star DE Derrick Morgan and respectable S Morgan Burnett with recruiting leftovers. But it didn’t, and after what we saw vs. USC last week, has anything definitively changed in that regard?

Maybe I’m just jaded because my gut feel is the Tigers will consequently be headed for the Dec. 27 Music City Bowl in Nashville – a fun place to visit, but not to spend working on Christmas Eve or Christmas day.

But the hunch is that the new No. 1 song two weeks after Clemson clinched the ’91 title – “Set Adrift on Memory Bliss,” by PM Dawn – won’t apply at about 11:45 p.m. Saturday.

PREDICTION: Georgia Tech 38, Clemson 30

Steele on curveballs, Tokyo and USC rushing stats

Kevin Steele certainly can put the “defensive” in defensive coordinator. But you get the sense it is more to protect from throwing players under the bus than anything else — he has referenced his episode with former Carolina Panthers LB Kevin Greene enough to understand why.

In this week’s interview with a few reporters, Steele provides some interesting insight into the unique methodology of Georgia Tech option wizard Paul Johnson.

Q: Do you expect them to just do what they do?

A: Broke down 10 games during the summer on them, then broke down this season on them. And it’s the same.

If you go back and watch the Navy film, it’s the same.

The thing Paul does a good job of, he calls the plays, then he’s going to see how you line up and attack. So if you’re giving him something, he’ll find it pretty quick, then you’ve got to get that stopped. See how you’re doing that, then he’ll attack something else. He stays a step ahead in play-calling.

So you can’t put too much on the first game, but you can’t just cast it out, either. Because he’s calling on the looks he’s seeing.

They say he watches film on fast forward. He’s just watching players, because the way you line up in traditional games is not relevant to him. He gets so many different looks that they’re conditioned to what are we getting, how do we attack.

Q: He doesn’t even appear to use a call sheet.

A: I don’t know. I watch a lot of film, but haven’t seen that. TV I don’t pay a lot of attention to.

Coach Osborne, in the I-bone stuff at Nebraska, he never had a play sheet. Because it’s all off of looks.

Q: The stats would seem to indicate they’ve been even more productive running that offense the second half of this season.

A: I think that’s pretty indicative of any offense. They say you make the biggest improvement from the first game to the second game. You kind of progress as you go, because it’s so much timing and execution.

Q: How much confidence can you take from shutting them down for most of the second through fourth quarters?

A: Well, we were executing very well. That was the key to it. We played blocks well. If we have the same kind of execution, we take a lot of confidence from it. If we don’t execute the same way, the confidence will dissipate very quickly.

Q: When you look at the film, do you see that others copied what you did?

A: We’ve got a pretty good template because I don’t know the answer to that question. I do know that in terms of what we ran, we have four tapes where we can see the same blocking schemes, the same looks. Now, how they came up with it, I don’t know.

But the problem is, you can’t be a fastball pitcher at him. We threw him a fastball the whole game last time, and he’s got it on tape. So we’ve had to go back and scratch some things out, and we have to throw some curveballs and knuckleballs. We can’t give him the same look. He’s too good of a coach for that.

We have to be able to do what we do, but change some things up, too.

Q: That fastball – Da’Quan Bowers had mentioned after that game about being used to crash down and take the dive from the end position. Was that it?

A: Well, that was one little wrinkle. I think we called it seven times in the game, and I think we didn’t call it any in the second half. Maybe twice at the most.

Q: Their quarterback, Josh Nesbitt, emerged in their final two drives.

A: Yeah, he hit his second and third passes out of 12 or 13. But it was crunch time, he did it.

I think one of the lessons – we had such a short week, that’s not an excuse, that’s a fact. So I think you have to be a little more prepared for third down than maybe what we were. We just didn’t have enough in our arsenal for third down, third-and-long. We’ll get that corrected.

Q: It’s obvious they throw almost exclusively to Demaryius Thomas. Does it work because you can only commit single coverage against their running game?

A: If anybody wants to email me ways to double him and defend dive-quarterback-pitch – well, they probably don’t want to email it, they probably want to package it and sell it before that. You could make a whole lot of money.

Q: How unique is this offense to prepare for, compared to other weeks?

A: It’s probably as different as New York City and Tokyo. I’ve been to both. They’ve got big buildings, they’ve got streets, they’ve got lights. But other than that, it’s a whole different deal.

We’ll play on a 120-yard field. It has hashmarks and numbers. But the rest of it is not even close.

Q: What impresses you about RB Jonathan Dwyer?

A: He’s a hard runner, and he has the ability to make a big play, which is a huge part of that offense.

They’ll take minus-2, 2, minus-1, 3, 4, 60. They’ll take that, and they do it very well. That would be harder to do if he didn’t have the ability to hit the home run. But he can hit the home run.

Their passing game’s the same way. They’ll throw 11 a game and may not complete but five of them. But they average 24 yards a catch. That’s a big chunk, now. Most people average seven.

Q: Gap control has been a recurring theme this week along the defensive line, especially after what happened …

A: Let me give you a little tidbit. What would you say if I told you per rush, that four other teams rushed per-rush for more yardage than South Carolina did? Now, we played terrible, not saying we didn’t. We played bad. We weren’t ourselves. But be careful what you do with numbers, because you look over there and see 233, you forget to look over there and see 57 and 3.8 yards per rush.

Miami, Virginia, Georgia Tech, TCU – all rushed per carry for more yards than South Carolina did.

Now, there are some plays, quarterback runs – a 10, 12, and I think an 18. Eight for 51 yards in the first half, seven for 6 yards in the second half.

That having been said, you just can’t go off the reservation with it.

Now, did we play uncharacteristic for us, unlike we’d played all year long? Absolutely. It’s real simple. It came clear after we dissected it. Guys got to pressing to make plays. When you start pressing to make plays, you’ve got problems.

If you go back and check my stats, make sure you take passing stats off. A sack doesn’t count in rushing yards.

Q: Where that question was going in a rambling way – as much as you’ve seen the wildcat formation and inside zone reads thrown your way because of struggles there, is there any correlation between that and what Georgia Tech does with the midline option?

A: With eyes, yes. With technique, yes. But in terms of alignment and deployment, no, it’s totally different.

The wildcat has some similarities, but you don’t have the rocket motion, which really creates the same concept, but from a totally different way. Georgia Tech doesn’t have a guy going in rocket motion who becomes a receiver. He’s pulled in with the rest of it.

Q: If you had to defend against C.J. Spiller, what would your philosophy be?

A: Go watch last year’s Alabama film and you’ll see.

You have to load the box on him and you have to keep him funneled. Because if he gets in space, it’s over. It’s a dangerous, dangerous deal if he gets in space.

Q: Is Dwyer a one-cut back?

A: No, not really. A little bit of that is because he’s so close to that quarterback, a lot of his runs become one-cut runs because everyone’s so close in the box, once he hits that seam on that direct angle … and he gets to that next level, he has enough speed and the speed hits the alley.

Q: Paul Johnson was saying they ran the midline option on you all more than anyone else as a curveball to what you did. Was there something about the look you were giving them?

A: Yeah, we didn’t execute very well. I think what got us discombobulated on it – they have the quarterback midline, where the quarterback opens up, the fullback goes (straight) and becomes the extra blocker, the A-back becomes the double-leader (blocker) and (Nesbitt) just follows him. Traditional midline.

What they did, I’d never seen before. I’m not saying they’d never run it before, but it wasn’t on any tape we had in here.

They took the fullback and put him (going to the other side on the dive). They took the wing back and wrapped him inside (to the same gap mentioned above, between the tackle and guard) and then brought the other wing back over and handed him the ball (basically replacing Nesbitt as the ball-carrier following the other A-back’s lead block). So it was a non-traditional play.

That play got us discombobulated on the play that we had repped. It froze us a little bit, that’s what happened. Because it looked like this, but then they started attacking us on that.

They ran it seven times. They had three big plays in the game – the 82-yarder, the 36-yarder and the 24-yarder. The 24-yarder came on a midline with the quarterback running it and the 36-yarder came when they ran the halfback midline.

That one went down to the 4 and they kicked the field goal. There were four tackles missed at the 8- to 10-yard gain area. Four tackles on one guy. So two things: It became a much bigger play than it was, but it was still a pretty nice play, anyway. At a critical time of the game. That gave them 24 (points).

What happened was they went away from it. Got it corrected at halftime and then kind of got it right.

Then we substituted because of normal substitution – and I’d be dadgum, I don’t know if he saw we substituted and said, “OK, we’ve got a new guy there now,” – because in the next-to-last drive, for the tying field goal, they ran it two times, right at him. And it wasn’t an ugly fit, but it wasn’t pretty. Didn’t make huge yardage on it, but it was critical. Seven, eight, but a first down.

By the time we got re-substituted, they didn’t run it anymore. The guy’s a good football coach, now. He knows how to attack people.

Q: Almost too many coincidences there.

A: When you study and talk to people who know coach Johnson very well, he’s kind of like, “OK, the safety just made the tackle on this play for a 4-yard gain. Run the exact same play- action, and run the post behind it. Because the corner’s going to be one-on-one if the safety is going to help make that tackle.”

So he has a knack for that kind of stuff.

He looks for things probably a little different than the way other people look for it. I’m not saying that’s what happened, but it was kind of odd it did happen.

We’ve got a GA who’s the most unbelievable thing I’ve seen in my life. Wesley Goodwin. That guy’s draws series cards, he brings them to me at halftime, and he reads them to me between the series.

It’s a card that has the formation, the call and the play drawn on it with all the routes, everything. He draws the game as it happens. And it’s right. It’s not something you look at the film on Sunday and say, wo, that wasn’t right. You can take the cards and just flip them with the film on Sunday. It’s amazing.

I ain’t never been around anybody like that. He does a job that two people have done in the past. He does it by himself. Because we don’t have the photos like the NFL.

He was with Charlie (Harbison) and Woody (McCorvey) at Mississippi State. Guy’s got an unbelievable mind. You’d be stunned if you saw that book. The play is drawn.

Q: Can Georgia Tech’s offense expand when they get more of a natural passer at quarterback?

A: That guy (Nesbitt) does what they do well. Everybody that evaluates that option quarterback. I can remember Kordell Stewart, and people questioning whether he could throw the ball well enough to go to the next level.

The guy is more accurate than people realize he is. He throws into a lot of one-on-one coverage and throws a lot of deep balls. That’s a lot to do, and when you’re an option quarterback, you throw on the run a lot. And you get a lot of funny looks. The guy’s 24 yards per catch. Hard to argue with that.

Q: How expansive is their route-running tree?

A: Surprising, enough. First snap of the Georgia game, they get in (two receiver set), tight bunch, clear route, over route, crossing route. Throw it to 8 on the crossing route. We’ve seen that formation out of five teams this year. But then you don’t see it the rest of the game.

Then they come back against us, McDaniel’s interception, first play of the game, they throw it deep. So they’ve got the whole tree. They’ve got hitches, screens, slants, 7-cut, 9-cut, 8-cut. They’ve got it, you just don’t see a whole lot of it. Eleven times (passing) a game, it’s hard to.

Unlike last week, where we had umpteen formations on that board, this one it’s one board. Here it is, run run run run run (about 10 more runs) pass.

They’ve got formations that are 67 to 2 and 62 to 2 run (to pass). Those two, one of them’s a touchdown, and the other’s like 60-some yards. Interesting.