November 19, 1999

1. The key to the Clemson victory can be summed up in four words: Thank you, Andy Josephson. He probably saved Tech's season when he grabbed Joe Don Reames on that late-game reverse and threw him for a four-yard loss. By refusing to let himself be taken out of the play, Josephson put Clemson in a fourth-and-seven situation where it would be much more difficult for Woody Dantzler to throw a dink pass or scramble for a first down. Tommy Bowden decided to go for all or nothing on one deep pass to the end zone, and Chris Young fortunately was there to bat it down. Game over. Tech wins (barely). We owe it all to a backup defensive end from the cornfields of Iowa.
   

   It was a strange, schizophrenic performance by the defense - very similar to what happened against Virginia. Tech shut down Clemson completely in the first and third quarters; the Tigers ran wild in the second and fourth quarters to erase 21 and 17-point deficits. Tech's coaching staff made the necessary adjustments at halftime, going to a "cage" scheme that cut down on Dantzler's scrambling and forced him to throw the ball. The defense executed that scheme superbly in the third quarter, not so superbly in the fourth quarter. It was ugly but, hey, it was a win. I imagine Georgia fans would have gladly settled for a three-point win over Auburn.

1. Part of the answer lies in recruiting decisions made by Coach O'Leary back in his first two seasons on the job. When O'Leary took over in 1995, the program was in desperate straits because of three sub-par recruiting classes by Bill Lewis. O'Leary was forced to go for the quick fix on defense, and he did it in two ways: he recruited two defensive linemen from the JUCO ranks who could play right away, and he signed 10 linebackers, reasoning that some of them would be athletic enough or would grow enough to be shifted to other positions. The strategy was partly successful. One of the JUCO defensive linemen, Jermaine Miles, was a productive starter during his two seasons at the Flats, but the other DL was injured most of the time he was here. Four of the 10 linebackers - Jesse Tarplin, Delaunta Cameron, Rodderick Roberts and Justin Robertson - became starters or productive backups. Four of the linebackers, however, quit the team or transferred without contributing to the program. O'Leary was forced to play all of the productive players (including DBs Jason Bostick, Jerry Caldwell and Brian Wilkins) as true freshmen, which meant that they were gone after the 1998 season. In fact, of the 15 defensive players signed by O'Leary that first season, the only ones still with the program are Conrad Andrzejewski, who was shifted to tight end, and Donte Booker, who sees limited action as a backup linebacker. There aren't any fifth-year senior starters on defense.

   Consider the 1996 class: Tech signed defensive linemen Felipe Claybrooks, Tony Robinson and Ira Claxton; linebacker Chris Edwards; and defensive backs Reggie Wilcox, Travares Tillman, Derrick Dudley, Troy Tolbert. Of those eight defensive signees, the only one who's been a productive, fulltime starter throughout his career at Tech has been Tillman. Claxton, Wilcox, Dudley and Tolbert see limited or no action on game day. Edwards had a great half-season in 1998, but has been hampered by injuries this year. Claybrooks has a world of potential, but has been in and out of the starting lineup and has not been as effective this year as he was last year. Robinson is in the rotation at defensive tackle but has not been able to win a starting job.

   Clearly, the coaching staff whiffed on some of those recruiting selections. A significant percentage of the players either left the program or never contributed much. The larger point is that those first two recruiting classes, whose players would be expected to provide senior or junior leadership on defense this year, produced only one consistently productive starter who is still in the program: Travares Tillman. And he's missed two games this season with injuries. Any coach will tell you that a successful team needs senior leadership. Tech doesn't have that on the defensive side of the ball.

   And, of course, there are those recruiting prospects who got away. Over the past few seasons, Tech was in the hunt for big-time players like Courtney Brown, Kenny Smith and Deon Grant, but they all chose other schools. How much better would Tech's pass rush be if they had Courtney Brown and Kenny Smith lining up at DE? No one bats a thousand, and it's unrealistic to expect the coaches to get every prospect they go after (even Jim Donnan doesn't get them all, as Auburn proved so convincingly last Saturday). However, there are players who wanted to come to Tech that the coaches took a pass on, like Keith Adams from Westlake High in metro Atlanta. Tech didn't offer Adams a 'ship because the coaches thought he was too small; all he's done as a linebacker at Clemson is break the ACC record for tackles for a loss. He was all over the field terrorizing Tech last Saturday as well. The kid is a stone-cold killer on defense, and he wanted to play for the Jackets. If the coaches honestly did not think Adams was big enough to be a contributor at the Division I level, then I certainly respect their judgment and I realize that we all make mistakes. But if you're not going to offer to Adams because of his size, then how do you justify giving a 'ship to Kelly Rhino, who's much smaller than Adams? Kelly Rhino is a great kid who has more than earned his scholarship with his play on special teams. Thank God the Tech coaches were open-minded enough to overlook his size and offer him a 'ship. Why couldn't they have been equally as open-minded with Adams? Wouldn't it have been great to have Adams on our side, rather than Clemson's?

   Getting the right players is one thing; selecting the right coach is another. When you hire a defensive coordinator, you want someone who can make adjustments on the fly, or at least during halftime, when things start going wrong. In the Virginia game, the coaching staff seemed to be totally clueless. Whatever adjustments they made at halftime didn't slow the Cavs down one iota in the second half. Against Clemson, the coaches seemed to be in the same state of befuddlement the entire second quarter. To their credit, they made adjustments at the half that worked at least for the duration of the third quarter (which was just enough to squeak out a win). But the question remains: is the current defensive coordinator the right man for the job? Should Tech replace him quickly, or can O'Leary afford to keep him around for another season of on-the-job training? And if it turns out he's not the right man for the job, has the program been harmed because he wasn't replaced quickly enough? That's a complex calculus for O'Leary to work out - but at least he's at a school that knows a little about calculus.

   I've always been an admirer of defensive coordinators like Don Lindsey and Erk Russell (yes, Erk was employed by the evil empire, but at least he had the good sense to leave). They could take players who didn't necessarily have All-American talent and motivate them to go out on the field and knock someone's head off. I don't sense that same desire among Tech's current defenders, but maybe it takes more time to develop it with young players.

   The bottom line is this: defensive shortcomings have harmed what could have been a very special season for the Tech players and coaches. Tech's defense has also become a subject of mockery and ridicule in the newspapers and on the radio talk shows. Coach O'Leary is a proud man. I wonder how long he will put up with that ridicule before changes are made.

   One other random thought: Tech's offense may be too good for its own good. Joe Hamilton has become so efficient lately that Tech's scoring drives rarely take more than a minute or two. This puts the defense back on the field quickly, without giving them much time to catch their breath. It might help if Joe and the Fridge could stretch out the scoring drives a little by calling more running plays. If nothing else, that keeps the opposition offense off the field for a longer period of time. Just an idle, random thought.

   By the way, I don't mean for this discussion of Tech's defense to belittle the effort Clemson put forth last Saturday. The Tigers may be lacking a little in talent and experience, but they never stop hustling and hitting. Tommy Bowden has proved he's one of the best young coaches in the game, and he does have the right guy (Reggie Herring) at defensive coordinator. If I had a vote, Bowden would be ACC coach of the year. Clemson will be back in contention for the conference championship next year. Bet on it.

1. That seems to be the conventional wisdom, and it's an absolute outrage. Ron Dayne's "career rushing record" has to be the most bogus career record ever amassed. He piled up the bulk of his yards against teams like UAB, Hawaii and Cincinnati (and even then, Dayne fumbled away the game to Cincy). Whenever Wisconsin faced a team with a real defense, Dayne's yardage suddenly shrunk to the sub-100 level. The idea that anyone should reward Dayne for his "career" achievements is also bogus. Heisman Trophy rules state that the award goes to "the best player in college football." Not the player who piles up big career numbers. After all, we had a similar situation two years ago: Heisman voters passed on Peyton Manning and his career achievements to give the award to Charles Woodson for his accomplishments IN THAT ONE SEASON. Why should it be any different for Dayne? Dayne's not the best player this season. He's not even the best running back - Thomas Jones would wipe up the field with him. He's just an overweight, overhyped player who was lucky enough to play against a lot of bearded-clam teams in his career. The sportswriters who vote on the trophy are too lazy and ignorant to look beyond Dayne's padded statistics. No way does he deserve the award over Joe Hamilton. Further proof, as Jimmy Carter once said, that life is not fair. But it still sux. Joe Hamilton, for this one season, has proved himself to be the best player in college football. He deserves the Heisman Trophy. It's a simple as that.

1. Ecstatic, excited, exuberant. It doesn't get any better for Tech fans when the good guys win and the bad guys lose in the same weekend - especially when the bad guys fall behind 38-0 at home to a team that trailed Central Florida in the fourth quarter. Especially when the Georgia fans, as classy as ever, get drunk and jump out of the stands and come down to the hedges to scream and curse at their own players. I hope every high school prospect visiting at the game took note of the fans' behavior. If you sign with Georgia, guys, you can expect that same high-class treatment from doggie fans for the next four or five years.

   What was most amazing about the game was that, according to the sportswriters at the Atlanta Journal/Constitution, there was no possible way Georgia could lose. After all, according to them, Donnan has signed back-to-back "Top 5" recruiting classes; Georgia has the most talented athletes in the whole SEC; Georgia has a defense that is (in the words of a Journal-Constitution headline) "young, talented and deep." Tony Barnhart, Mark Shlachbach and Mark Bradley have been spreading this manure for years (although Bradley, judging by his recent columns, may finally be waking up to reality). Chip Towers, the current Georgia beat writer for the Journal-Constitution, was on talk radio before the game smugly boasting that "Georgia has too much talent for Auburn - they need to take control of the game early, and I think they will." Brilliant analysis, Chip. In the face of such an athletic juggernaut, how could a team like Auburn even think of winning?

   The lesson here is that individual players, no matter how athletic or talented they may be, do not win football games. Teams do. Auburn played as a team Saturday, and that made all the difference in the world. Georgia's players have heard so many times from Donnan and the fans about how great they are, that they believe all they have to do is show up on game day and the other team will cower in fear. Well, guess what? Auburn wasn't scared. And Georgia's players will soon discover that Ole Miss and Tech aren't scared of them either.

   When the Atlanta media bother to talk about Tech at all, they spend all their time criticizing Tech's defense. But what about Georgia's? Since starting the season against four bearded-clam teams in the friendly confines of Sanford Stadium, Georgia's defense has allowed these point totals over the past five games: 37, 17, 34, 30 and 38. That's 156 points in five games, or an average of 31.2 points per game. That is not the mark of a good defense. We've also heard all this hot air from Georgia fans about what a great quarterback Quincy Carter is. In Georgia's three losses this year, the offense has scored 55 total points, or an average of 18.3 points a game. Quincy sure does seem to disappear whenever the going gets tough.