Yeah, that’s fair. It’s a reasonable expectation to hope that Wake could have a top 15 offense and combine it with a top 50 defense. But the years we’ve had that top 15 offense we had defenses ranking closer to 75.Sure. And one of the most frustrating things of the Clawson era is that Wake has yet to combine a top 15 ("elite") offense with an average P5 defense.
Using SP+ (not perfect, by any means) we have had 1 season where our offense and defense were better than the national average in the same season. So I probably should have said "above-average" instead.Assuming you define "strong" as ranking in the top 25 statistically, about 5 teams a year have both a strong offense and a strong defense. Definitely less than 10 do. So essentially what you are saying is that the most frustrating thing about the Clawson era to you is that we have never been one of the best 10 teams in the FBS.
If we aren't going to reach that level I think I'd prefer to be top 15 on one side of the ball and weaker on the other, as to me that type of team has a greater chance at legit upsets than a team that is simply top 40 on both sides of the ball but not elite at either.
I don't have access to a full list to compare, but we were way above-average compared to the ACC in both '21 (38) and '22 (43.3)Have we ever had a top 15 offense in SP+?
Have we ever had a top 15 offense in SP+?
Also, think it may be time to slow the offensive pace. For the past few seasons, the WF strategy was to maximize the number of plays and possessions because the offense was the strength; WF would outscore most opponents with a superior offense. Not the case this year, and really not the case against Clemson. Also, Clemson is a slower paced team; can see the staff deciding the best chance to stay in the game is to reduce the number of possessions. That said, to do so would go against everything WF has practiced for a few seasons.
Run the ball, protect the ball, rely on the defense and flipping the field. That plays to our strengths for this year, and to Pilch's point, gives us the best chance to stay in the game.
Historically doesn't Clawson have a rep for worse performances after 2 weeks prep? I don't know if that's changed in recent years or not as I have not really given it as much thought, but I remember it being a criticism at one point.I've mostly surrendered to the idea that we are pretty bad this year. but I also think it would be a pretty low watermark for Clawson if we can't at least stay competitive against this mid ass Clemson team on 2 weeks of preparation. if anything, this is when we should sneak one by them. there's a part of me that still wants to believe the offseason hype in spite of what I saw on the field so far this year.
My fear is that this season is analagous to the 2010 team. After a run of success, the wheels fall off and, after a bit of a dead cat bounce in 2011, Grobe lets the wheels fall off.
I haven't seen much so far that gives me optimism. The D is marginally better than past years, but not dominant. The O is significantly worse. I'm not sure what happened to the OL (especially the tackles), but they have been just awful.
.
I just tried to wipe this floating period at the end of your post off of my screen with my finger.My fear is that this season is analagous to the 2010 team. After a run of success, the wheels fall off and, after a bit of a dead cat bounce in 2011, Grobe lets the wheels fall off.
I haven't seen much so far that gives me optimism. The D is marginally better than past years, but not dominant. The O is significantly worse. I'm not sure what happened to the OL (especially the tackles), but they have been just awful.
.
Thank you Mike ElkoIn the early Clawson years, the defense was solid and the offense was a mess.