Stop me if you’ve heard this before: Clemson is preparing to play a game with outrageously massive stakes against a team crowned by the media at-large as the eventual champion for reasons that seem bizarre and misguided to many rational thinkers within the fan base.
Seriously, this again?
Painting with a broad stroke—probably too broad, because SOMEBODY has to pick Clemson, right?—it is apparent that Alabama is bigger, faster, stronger, and has more trophies than Clemson. Yes, in our narrative, all of those points matter roughly the same amount.
Because the media critique of the Clemson-Oklahoma game was so badly misguided (did they get anything right?) it feels right to examine some of the conventional wisdom ideas about the matchup between the Tigers and the Crimson Tide on Monday. We’ll take a look at each one to see if the reality matches the storyline, sort of a college football version of “Mythbusters”.
All of these statements are either accepted as fact or have been spouted by enough media types that I’ve adopted it as a “media take” on the game—like, “Oklahoma’s just a hot team” or “Clemson’s defense really struggled down the stretch of the season” or “Baker Mayfield is so fiery”.
You know, those kinds of things. Let’s begin.
- Alabama struggles with dual-threat quarterbacks like Deshaun Watson.
This one is interesting because it seems like a narrative of the past. In previous years, hurry-up no-huddle spread offenses gave Nick Saban’s defense all kinds of problems. For recent evidence of this, look no further than last year’s semifinal when Ohio State took the Tide behind the woodshed.
There really wasn’t an arduous process of determining which quarterbacks on Bama’s schedule could be considered “dual-threat”. The lines were pretty clear-cut. Three candidates stood out: Ole Miss’ Chad Kelly, Tennessee’s Joshua Dobbs, and Mississippi State’s Dak Prescott.
The Tide did an exceptional job of keeping all three of these guys under wraps, holding them to a combined 54 yards on 50 carries. That includes a whopping 16 sacks—nine came against Prescott—which is 32 percent of Bama’s nation-leading 50 sacks for the season.
Such dominance over the quarterback running game makes it tough, then, to explain how these teams were able to move the ball effectively against Bama’s vaunted defense. Those three games were the worst of the season for Saban/Kirby Smart in terms of yards per play allowed—especially Ole Miss’ whopping 6.7 yards per play.
Based on this three-game sample size, it doesn’t appear that Alabama struggles with dual-threat quarterbacks running the ball, but the Crimson Tide do seem to have a problem stopping them throwing it. Kelly and Prescott both went over their season averages in passing yardage—and had the two highest passer ratings against Bama all season—while Dobbs was just beneath his.
It’s clear that mobile quarterbacks stress Alabama’s defense in a way that allows for plays to be made in the passing game. That would seem to play right into Deshaun Watson’s hands.
Verdict: True, but not in the way you might think
- Clemson isn’t physical enough at the lines of scrimmage for the class of the SEC.
This argument assumes two things. First, it pegs Clemson as a softer team because of conference affiliation. Second, it pegs Alabama as tough because of—among a host of much better reasons—its conference affiliation.
I understand the peer groups are different, but let’s examine how each conference rated the respective lines of scrimmage. After all, the lines of scrimmage typically reflect the level of toughness within a team and program.
For Alabama, the AP voted LT Cam Robinson and C Ryan Kelly to the first team offense. They voted DT A’Shawn Robinson and DE Jonathan Allen to the first team defense, while DT Jarran Reed was voted to the second team defense. That’s two offensive linemen and three defensive linemen.
For Clemson, the AP voted LG Eric Mac Lain to the first team offense and C Jay Guillermo to the second team offense. They placed DE Shaq Lawson on the first team defense and DT Carlos Watkins on the second team defense. That makes two picks on both lines of scrimmage, just behind the Tide’s haul.
These rankings are largely subjective, and there are multiple teams picked by multiple groups. We could have just as easily picked the coaches’ selections or another media entity, but the results would suggest both schools were considered in similar class by those that form national perception.
A more even way to look at the split here is to examine both teams’ pro prospects on the lines of scrimmage. Again, this is inexact because these rankings only take into account draft-eligible players, but it will help us make our determinations.
According to NFLDraftScout.com’s most recent draft projections, here are the 2016 line-of-scrimmage NFL prospects on both teams, sorted by overall and positional rank:
9 (1) Alabama DT A’Shawn Robinson
12 (3) Clemson DE Shaq Lawson
19 (3) Alabama DT Jarran Reed
22 (5) Alabama DE Jonathan Allen
57 (1) Alabama C Ryan Kelly
214 (19) Clemson DT D.J. Reader
215 (12) Clemson OG Eric Mac Lain
248 (20) Alabama OT Dominick Jackson
Alabama has more prospects and more top-tier prospects than Clemson does among its veteran players. Among prospects not named above, here are a few standouts in future draft classes, sorted by position rank:
Offensive Line
2017 Clemson C Jay Guillermo (6)
2018 Alabama OT Cam Robinson (1)
Alabama C J.C. Hassenaur (6)
Alabama OG Bradley Bozeman (8)
Clemson OG Tyrone Crowder (10)
2019 Clemson OT Mitch Hyatt (3)
Alabama C Brandon Kennedy (3)
Alabama C Josh Casher (6)
Alabama OG Ross Pierschbacher (10)
Alabama OG Dallas Warmack (15)
Clemson OT Jake Fruhmorgen (21)
Defensive Line
2017 Clemson DT Carlos Watkins (10)
Clemson DE Kevin Dodd (16)
2018 Alabama DE DaShawn Hand (6)
Alabama DT Joshua Frazier (14)
Clemson DT Scott Pagano (19)
2019 Alabama DT Daron Payne (3)
Clemson DT Christian Wilkins (4)
Clemson DT Albert Huggins (24)
Not all of these players will make an impact on Monday’s game, but this data does tell us a couple of things. First, the scouts in question love Alabama’s depth on the offensive line. It’s clear the Tide have the advantage there. It looks like a wash, if not a slight edge to Clemson, on the defensive line.
Luckily for us, we don’t have to weigh which front is better. The argument stated Clemson wasn’t “physical enough” to compete. While Bama may have better talent stockpiled, the Tigers are certainly capable of hanging in there.
Verdict: False
- Jake Coker is nothing more than a game manager.
The title of “game manager” is something of a death knell for quarterbacks. Nobody wants that label. It means you lack the capability of making critical winning plays for your football team.
Coker has often been described this way, as have many of Alabama’s quarterbacks in the recent past—except Blake Sims a season ago. (Hmmm, wonder why that might be…?) Fair or not, it’s how people around the country perceive his ability. It’s not a total knock on his game, just a way of qualifying his value on his particular team.
There are several marks of a “game manager” at quarterback. He has few pass attempts, especially relative to his team’s rush attempts. He has a low per-attempt average. He throws few touchdowns and interceptions, which leads to a high passer rating.
There are 114 qualifying quarterbacks at the FBS level this season. Coker ranks 33rd in passer rating (143.2), placing him just outside the top quadrant in the country. His 18 touchdown and 9 interceptions place him just inside the halfway mark. The same goes for his 7.5 yards per attempt, although his 11.2 yards per completion ranks 87th in the country.
Furthermore, Alabama has run the football on 58.6 percent of its plays this season. In my view, that constitutes “game manager” territory for a quarterback. Only four times in 14 games has Coker thrown at least 30 passes. In those games, he has thrown 10 touchdowns and 5 interceptions—a 2-to-1 ratio that isn’t really conclusive either way in this discussion.
One thing that suggests Coker is more than meets the eye is his propensity to dial it up when things get tight. In the games decided 13 points or fewer, plus the semifinal game against Michigan State, the Florida State transfer has increased his workload and productivity. That’s not exactly worthy of “game manager” status.
This one makes my head spin. I don’t think Coker is super dynamic, but I’m not sure he fits the definition of a “game manager” fully, either.
Verdict: Not really
- Clemson’s defense can’t handle Derrick Henry.
For this one, we’ll have to take some liberties. A lot of this is based upon my own observations over the course of time. Hey, math can’t cover everything.
Henry’s allure is twofold: the punishing way in which he runs combined with the durability to wear down opposing fronts over the course of a four-quarter game. He is a downhill runner that can add speed once his 6-3, 242-pound frame gets going.
Not sure if you’ve heard, but he also won the Heisman Trophy in an odd year for voting. Just wanted to get that out of the way.
The Tigers have had particular success against backs like Henry, though, because of the way their defensive front seven likes to attack the line of scrimmage. Linebackers Ben Boulware and B.J. Goodson are at their best moving vertically, not laterally, so strong run support against a between-the-tackles runner is a big part of Clemson’s defensive DNA.
There are three tailbacks that have profiles similar to Henry’s on Clemson’s schedule: Notre Dame’s C.J. Prosise, North Carolina’s Elijah Hood, and Oklahoma’s Samaje Perine. These three backs are big backs that run downhill and possess elite ability in the college game.
Here are the stat lines for these three players in their respective matchups with Clemson:
Prosise—15 carries, 50 yards (3.3 YPC)
Hood—14 carries, 65 yards (4.6 YPC)
Perine—15 carries, 58 yards (3.9 YPC)
As you can see, Clemson handled this trio pretty well. None of these backs even remotely approached their season averages against the Tigers. These are 5-to-6 yard backs in terms of per-carry average, and Clemson shut them down.
One main difference for Henry is that he leads the nation with 359 carries for the season. He will almost certainly tote the rock at least 25 times in his matchup with the Tigers, so it will be difficult to keep him underneath 100 yards on the ground, even with a strong defensive showing.
Clemson will be the sixth top-25 rush defense Henry has faced this season. Here’s how he did against the other five:
Ole Miss—23 carries, 127 yards (5.5 YPC)
Arkansas—27 carries, 95 yards (3.5 YPC)
LSU—38 carries, 210 yards (5.5 YPC)
Florida—44 carries, 189 yards (4.3 YPC)
Michigan State—20 carries, 75 yards (3.8 YPC)
Henry has averaged about 4.6 yards per carry in those five contests. It seems reasonable to expect him to amass between 100 and 120 yards given around 25 carries against Clemson’s defense. That’s far from an unstoppable running back.
Verdict: False
- Calvin Ridley will destroy Mackensie Alexander.
I’m actually pretty surprised this one has gained traction, but quite a few people seem to think this will be a game in which Alexander gets exposed.
Ridley is a very talented player who has undoubtedly made a huge impression on the season for Alabama. On top of that, he’s a freshman with plenty of work to do in order to round out his game. Catching 83 passes for 1,031 yards as a first-year contributor is no joke.
The stud youngster has also seemed to get better each week. He has gone over 100 yards receiving in each of his team’s two postseason games. He caught eight balls for 102 yards against Florida in the SEC title game in a matchup with Vernon Hargreaves III, NFLDraftScout.com’s third-best cornerback prospect in the 2016 draft class.
One of the two players rated ahead of Hargreaves is Alexander, who has become a shutdown cornerback in his second season of playing time. Notre Dame’s Will Fuller found out the hard way, as Alexander held him to only two catches for 37 yards. Oklahoma’s Sterling Shepard had seven receptions for 87 yards, but much of that work came underneath and in the slot.
Simply put, Alexander doesn’t lose one-on-one matchups—especially not to a freshman. I won’t put this one completely out of the question given Ridley’s output against a very good corner in Hargreaves, but I doubt this turns into a Calvin Ridley coming-out party.
Verdict: Leaning Alexander
- A lack of practice time puts Clemson at a disadvantage.
I get why this is a concern, mostly just because of the principle of the matter. Two teams playing in a championship game shouldn’t be subject to different rules regarding practice time, but in this case, they are. Clemson has to adhere to a 20-hour restriction since the spring semester starts on Wednesday, while Alabama’s staff gets unfettered access to its players with classes beginning a week later.
It’s assumed Nick Saban will certainly take advantage of every second to pick up an advantage over the Tigers. However, Clemson isn’t panicking. In fact, Dabo Swinney is spinning this as a positive.
Think about this: Alabama is playing by a different set of rules with regards to its preparation. It gets the freedom to set its own schedule, but it’s also a totally different routine than what the Tide players have seen all season long.
Meanwhile, Clemson gets to treat this like a normal week, with a similar schedule and format to a regular season game. In a “do what we do” culture, it isn’t hard for Swinney to explain why it’s actually his team with the advantage here.
I don’t think it actually hurts Alabama to have more practice time. Overpreparing is a thing, but it’s tough to do that with such an experienced staff in these types of situations. After careful consideration, I really don’t think it affects Clemson much, either.
File this one under “much ado about nothing”.
Verdict: Negligible impact
God Bless!
WQ