The AntiBowden

Every year, Bowden takes the football team to church. It's a completely voluntary event (you don't have to go if you're agnostic or a towelhead or whatnot.) However, the ACLU just can't stand the image of a bunch of red blooded, hard working, American Dream living boys heading off to church as a team, so they are suing.

From the article:

"If the coach had taken his team to another religion, I doubt we would ever have heard from the ACLU," he said, adding, "He is doing what he thinks is best for the group, and absolutely no harm would come from that."

Amen to that. This is just the ACLU trying to destroy Christianity in every way they possibly can as a part of their goal to turn America in to a government worshiping communist society. This isn't a political blog though, so I digress.

While I'd love to see Bowden get fired for just about any reason under the sun, I simply must stand up on his side on this issue. I think Bowden is in the right, he's doing something that's good for the team, and the ACLU should be hunted down and shot. This is the ONLY time you'll ever see me defend Bowden, so cherish it.

+newsvine   +digg   +del.icio.us   +reddit
Posted by Tom on Thursday, November 29, 2007 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post

Willy Mac over at Danny Ford is God wrote this article summing up his feelings about Tommy Bowden. Take a look at it, then come back to see my thoughts...

OK, overall this is a pretty good article. Willy has a little bit more positive attitude than I do about Bowden, but he does manage to get in some valid criticisms. I especially liked this part:

When he restructures his contract, perhaps he should offer to take a pay cut as a trade off for more years. That money lost should be filtered into the incentives of his contract. He should also lessen his buy out because sometimes it feels as if he is holding us hostage. He hasn't won anything yet, so he is still unproven. The honorable thing to do would to stop digging in our pockets when he hasn't earned it yet. He feels like that buddy that always borrows money, but probably won't get you back. "C'mon man, you know I'm good for it."

I couldn't agree more. Bowden has been using his last name to hold us over a barrell for 9 years now, you would think we would realize that. He came in talking trash about Clemson and demanding this high salary as if he was going to win something, yet hasn't in a decade. Somehow this equates to a contract extension...

If I were writing the extension, it would have incentives and penalties. For example, for every blowout loss, Bowden would lose $200k. Every year we don't win the ACC, Bowden would lose $500k, etc. He's making about $1.4 million a year, so he could swing it.

I do take issue with some of the things said in this article though. For instance:

Sub Rob Spence, Bowden has a baller set of assistant coaches that are loyal to Clemson University and our goals. In actuality, I think Spence has a great play book (minus the screens) for this offense but he either chooses the wrong plays at the wrong times or he gets a comfy lead and then starts coaching not to lose.

I couldn't disagree with this more. Our assistant coaches are good guys, but every year we have problems with simple fundamentals that really shouldn't even be an issue, i.e. catching a punt on the 2 yard line, things like that. Also, Rob Spence's playbook is based on screen plays, so if you take those away there isn't much left. Spence is the worst hire I could have imagined and the reason he was hired is that Bowden is committed to the spread gimmick, Fun 'N Punt offense. Too many trick plays, not enough fundamentals.

Anyway, good job Willy Mac.

+newsvine   +digg   +del.icio.us   +reddit
Posted by Tom on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post

Did Tommy Bowden sandbag in 2006 by keeping Harper on the bench to lower expectations in 2007? The idea hit me today while flying from Atlanta to Florida...



Let's think about this. In 2006, Will Proctor lost all confidence and by the time we played our Bowl game against Kentucky, he couldn't complete a pass longer than 10 yards in the air. In 2007, Cullen Harper comes out slinging and goes several games without throwing an interception while throwing lots of TDs and lots of great passes. Everyone was hoping for Willy Korn, but Harper came out looking like he was going to keep Korn on the bench until 2009.

So... the logical question that everyone should have been asking was: where was this last year? Was the kid really that bad that he couldn't even get a series while Proctor was taking a nose dive and losing games single-handedly? Did he really improve that much in one year?

Obviously, the answer is no. Obviously Cullen Harper should have been given a shot in 2006. I'd even go so far as to say he should have started the last 4 games. But he didn't.

Why didn't he? Does Bowden stick with the upperclassmen to the end, no matter what? Well no, just look at the way he threw Willie Simmons under the bus. So what was it that made Bowden stick with Proctor?

Sandbagging, or the art of lowering expectations by purposefully underperforming.

Tommy Bowden knew that after 2007 he was either going to be fired or given a contract extension, and he knew that if expectations where high and he failed to win the ACC he would probably get fired, so he had to lower expectations in order to get the extension. So, to that end, he kept Harper on the bench and let doubt grow and controversy erupt over the QB position. He knew in 2006 that if he put Harper in and he came out blasting, the hype machine would start churning and everyone would be talking about the great things to come in 2007. He couldn't let that happen, because then people would expect him to perform.

Now look what happened in 2007: Expectations were low coming into the year because nobody knew if we would have a QB or not, and most people were expecting the team to rely on a freshman QB who'd never seen a college field of play. We did have two of the best RBs in the nation, a solid defense, some great receivers, and what turned out to be a great QB, so on talent alone we won 9 games. When you look at those 9 games though, it's not that impressive:

We beat three weak OOC teams: Furman, LA-Monroe, CMU
We beat four weak ACC teams: Wake, NC State, Maryland, Duke
We beat one mediocre ACC team: FSU
We beat a bad SEC team: SC (they lost 5 in a row)

We lost to one mediocre ACC team: GT
We lost to the only two good teams we played: VT and BC

So, in any rational person's view, we had yet another mediocre season under Tommy Bowden, and yet another no-show in the ACC title game.

However, in the eyes of many Tiger fans and unfortunately in the eyes of the Administration, this equates to progress for the program and a contract extension for Tommy Bowden. The main reason given: we were expected to win 7, maybe 8 games, but instead we won 9, so that must mean we have a great coaching staff that's taking us in the right direction.

Wrong. We're in the same spot we've been for the last 15 years. Was it all planned out this way by Bowden to ensure that contract extension? I don't know. It wouldn't surprise me though.

+newsvine   +digg   +del.icio.us   +reddit
Posted by Tom on Tuesday, November 27, 2007 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post

The purpose of this blog is to point out the inability of Tommy Bowden to win an ACC Championship while coaching at Clemson University. Clemson fans nationwide deserve better, but instead we get hype, letdowns, and excuses year in and year out. Our goal is to illustrate why Tommy Bowden is not the right coach to take Clemson University to the next level.

This blog was started in response to this ridiculous, poorly designed move by the Clemson Athletics Department.

This blog will cease to exist on the day that Tommy Bowden wins the ACC Title while coaching for Clemson University.

Signed, Tom Utley.

+newsvine   +digg   +del.icio.us   +reddit
Posted by Tom on Monday, November 26, 2007 | Permalink | Comments | links to this post