Biz, it's all good between us. But I'll take a team that's 9-3 ATS over a 6-7 ATS team any day or night of the week. The Sooners are for real, Clemson is smoke and mirrors, that close shave with South Carolina convinced me of that. GL my friend from the Bay.
~T~
Smoke and mirrors? That's silly.
Clemson's success has been the exact opposite of smoke and mirrors. According to Football Outsiders, Clemson is 9th in adjusted line yards, a metric that defines how well a team run blocks. It's 4th in adjusted sack rate.
On defense, Clemson is 4th in adjusted line yards. It's 14th in adjusted sack rate.
Clemson also has probably the best quarterback in the country--a former 5-star, #1 dual threat QB who hasn't lost a game he's started and finished.
Clemson is winning because it is very good on the lines on both run and pass downs, and because it has +++++ QB play. Clemson's score results have not equated to its on-field dominance for a couple of reasons. Turnovers have had an impact, but teams have scored lots of garbage time TDs against Clemson.
For instance, Clemson outgained South Carolina by 200+ on the road, but USC scored with no time on the clock to make the game look like a one-score game. In truth, after Clemson scored to go up 14-0 in the 2nd quarter, USC never possessed the ball with a chance to take the lead.
Clemson outgained UNC by 200+, and led by 18 through much of the 2nd half. Clemson moved the ball at will and contained UNC through much of the game.
Even against teams like Wake Forest, where the winning margin was only 20 points, Clemson outgained its opponent by 400 (!) yards. 33-13 looks like Clemson and Wake were playing the same game. People watching that game realize that Clemson could have named its score.
Clemson sometimes has little interest in beating up on the little guy even when it can. Clemson does turn it on in crunch time, though. Against FSU, Clemson was a 10-point favorite and hit that number by holding FSU out of the endzone for the last 59 minutes.
When I hear smoke and mirrors, I think of a team that's living on the edge, getting lucky breaks to win games they have no business winning. Clemson is the opposite. It's given other teams those lucky breaks, and won anyway.
Offensive line play, defensive line play, and QB play. That's a combination as old as time (it helps that Clemson has multiple NFL WRs and 2 NFL 1st round DBs). But there's nothing smoke and mirrors about what Clemson's done. It's mostly been stuffing the ball down people's throats.
If Clemson loses a game, it will be because they don't have much of a clue on special teams (kicker aside) and tend to give up short fields all game long.