Getting Respect
Aug 8th 2008 - Written by: John Webb
Katie, where are you now? The summer of 1987 was when you stopped being our buddy’s kid sister, and started becoming the girl that all the boys dated. How many 10th graders did you damn to sweet perdition with your lethal blue eyes? What a difference a summer makes! That is the definition of changing perception, and that is what Clemson needs to experience if the Tigers are ever to transform from a spectacled shrinking violet to the belle of the ball.
If you don’t think that Clemson has a perception problem, then you haven’t been paying attention lately. One play away… overrated... can beat anyone… can lose to anyone… delusional fan base… propped up in a bad conference… Bowden on the hot seat… talented, especially at the skill positions, but the Tigers are going to have to prove it this time. Forget the hair gel prophets on the four-letter network who continually shovel dirt on our graves (hello Mark May’s 6-6 2007 season prediction), let’s look at what’s written on the web every day. The era of good feelings they ain’t. Ladies and gentlemen of TigerNation jury, allow me to enter exhibits A through F: Matt Hayes is off Bowden's Christmas card list, Richard Cirminiello too, this one is over the top, so you like Wake, go back to Athens, and we're tough enough Marc. The court reporter is giving me dirty looks, so no more evidence, though we could do it until the gavel sounds.
What to do? There are two approaches to gaining respect, but first, a little explanation. Clemson needs to attain a high ranking in order to have a shot at a BCS bid should we (gulp) not win the ACC Championship. Clemson is in good preseason position to do this with a #9 Coaches’ Poll ranking. If Clemson lays a couple of eggs against Alabama and NC State, our mascot could soon be the paper tiger viewed, fairly or unfairly, by many of the voters in the polls. Our boys simply cannot let that happen, because it would eliminate any chance that Clemson would have of pursuing one of two approaches to garnering respect with these very voters. Approach #1 is winning consistently and Approach #2 is winning dramatically.
Win Consistently
Let’s look at Oklahoma’s record since 2000, the 2nd year of Bob Stoops’ tenure, when he started to get things rolling.
Year |
Record |
Final AP Ranking |
2000 |
13-0 |
1 |
2001 |
11-2 |
6 |
2002 |
12-2 |
5 |
2003 |
12-2 |
3 |
2004 |
12-1 |
3 |
2005 |
8-4 |
22 |
2006 |
11-3 |
11 |
2007 |
11-3 |
8 |
Did you realize that Oklahoma has won fewer than 11 games only once in the last 8 years? I bet you didn’t. I bet you aren’t questioning why they are now ranked #4 in the Coaches’ Poll (no matter how awesome Thunder and Lightning are); because you realize there is a really great chance that Oklahoma is going to win at least 11 games in 2008.
Clemson has had well-documented problems with consistency. It is my belief that this is being addressed through talent on the field, which simply has not been there in the past. Unfortunately, winning consistently is something that can only be accomplished over a period of years. More to come on talent in future columns.
Isn’t this column going well? In fact, I have just been notified by the hair gel prophets at the four-letter network that this is, and I quote, “the greatest article ever penned by man.” George Will, tender your resignation. Al Gore, power down the entire internet except for TigerNation. No one has done it this well, or will ever do it this well again. Let’s put this in perspective: the hair gel prophets at the four-letter network are fawning over me like no one since the 2004 Oklahoma Sooners, who they pronounced “The Greatest Team of All Time” prior to the 2005 Orange Bowl.
Fact: there are not many people capable of original thought, and those who are capable do not exercise their capability very often. With regard to football polls, this means that there are very few people who know if a team is any good or not. More importantly, they don’t know why they’re good. If someone on television were to say that the key to Ricky Sapp getting more sacks this year is better use of his hands, I would totally discount that unless it was credited to Coach Rumph. Why? It’s because there are very few people capable of original thought, so whoever would say that only expresses his comfort with the prevailing groupthink. I highly doubt that there are any pundits with the knowledge, resources, time, and drive to break down film on more than a handful of teams. Now, the groupthink that I am desirous of would be diametrically opposed to the negative articles that I cited earlier. Analysts/voters/fans need to become comfortable with the idea that Clemson is a dominant football team, and our team needs to bear that out on the field. We only need one bold media warrior to lead the vanguard in setting a new tone in Clemson coverage – Mark May?... what sweet irony that would be. (Editorial note: Please do not confuse recruiting guru Tom Lemming with the talking heads/voters in the polls, who act like a pack of lemmings. You can tell the difference because there is only one Tom Lemming, and he can be recognized as the one steering recruits to Notre Dame.)
Win Dramatically
Clemson has been so inconsistent in recent years that winning dramatically may be the only option left on the table. The dramatic win, however, has to be nestled in a double digit win season in order for it to register in the ledgers of relevance. Here are some big games that have counted little from a national perspective: 2005 Texas A&M, 2003 Tennessee, 2003 Florida State, 2003 South Carolina, 2004 Miami, 2006 Georgia Tech, and many others. The context of the season was not enough to raise the importance of the game.
Here is what we’re looking for:
West Virginia stuns Georgia in Sugar
No. 11 Big East kings prove worth with 38-35 win over No. 8 Bulldogs
If you will remember, the Big East was the butt of everyone’s jokes, and West Virginia fared little better. The Mountaineers won the Big East conference with a 10-1 record and earned the right to enjoy a week in New Orleans – oops, make that Atlanta, before getting pummeled in what was a de facto home game for Georgia. Then came the 2006 Sugar Bowl, and West Virginia was winning 28-0 over the SEC champions at the beginning of the 2nd quarter. You saw men with forlorn faces and you saw coeds cry. That’s pretty much the definition of schadenfreude. Not so coincidentally, West Virginia was preseason #5 in the AP and #7 in USA Today the following fall.
Can we please order up a 30 point win over Alabama? The schedule is not strong this year, so Clemson will have few opportunities to dominate a good opponent. Also, this is a game that is certain to get the largest television crowd of the weekend, so a lot of voters and pundits will be watching. In all honesty, Clemson needs this game much more than Alabama does.
A bit of my soul dies every time I read a one-sentence paragraph.
This sentence has no intrinsic value either.
JOHN, YOU FOOL! You had the perfect column within your clutches and you blew it. You include two meaningless self-referential paragraphs to close out some beatific prose. Did your fingers cramp, or was it your brain? Of course, the hair gel prophets at the four-letter network knew this would happen, but they simply omitted it in their pre-column predictions. John Webb was far too inexperienced, and though he possessed some talent, it was obvious to all at the four-letter network that he would choke. In fact, he never would have made any serious top 25 ranking. By the way, Oklahoma “The Greatest Team of All Time” lost the 2005 Orange Bowl to Southern Cal 55-19 and finished #3 in the polls. Perception’s change.
If you would like to comment on this column then you can email John at sectionHrowJ@gmail.com.
[ Back ]
