1-0 Terps in the 30th 28th courtesy of an Abe Thompson goal in the 16th. http://livestats.theacc.collegesports.com/livestats/data/m-soccer/265103/gt_index.html Thompson's goal, BTW, makes him the all-time leading scorer (in terms of points) in school history. He now has 110 points, 1 better than Eberhard Klein, who played at Maryland in the 60's.
2-0 in the 70th courtesy of Jason Garey's 17th of the season in the 50th minute, assisted by Stephen King.
Game over, 2-0 final. Clemson finishes 8-9-1, their worst record in years. Honestly, I can't remember the last time the Tiggers finished below .500. No excuses for a program like Clemson to not be competitive. Trevor's head won't roll over this - this is college soccer, afterall - but it's still very disapointing.
No accountability. It is a disgrace for a program like Clemson to finish with a loosing record. They have everything to be a top contender every season. I hope everyone from the coaching staff to the players will look at themselves in the mirror and evaluate their responsibility. In reality we should not be shocked. It was in the making after a couple of "average" seasons by the Tigers.
Clemson will be back next year because Adair is raging right now and they return a lot of players with some recruits from non-traditional areas who will have a big impact.
I think next year will be the most important year of Adair's tenure at Clemson. Two years ago, after the team that Doug Warren, Ricky Lewis, Dimelon Westfield and the little Brazilian center mid got eliminated by Stanford in the quarterfinals - the second straight year and fourth time in six Clemson lost in the QFs - Adair was quoted as saying he needed to go out and get a "different type of player" because the ones he was bringing in weren't capable of getting over the hump in big games and making it to the Final Four. I was never positive about what he meant by a different type of player but I assumed he meant getting some guys who were a little grittier and more athletic and not bringing in so many youth national team, HS All America types. Well, two years later, and the quarterfinals are but a distant memory for Clemson. Last year they squeeked into the NCAAs and went out in the first round and this year they have the first losing record in memory. So, while the other kind of players Adair was recruiting may not have known how to win big games, at least they were able to get them there, which is something he can't say for the current crop. Worse, players are leaving the program. Saint Louis starts two transfers from Clemson and SMU, one of the highest ranked teams in the country, starts another. That's never a good sign when players are bailing on your program for other top teams and you're teams start doing badly. It could be that in a couple years we'll look back at this season as just a hiccup during a transition period for Clemson. But, if he doesn't right things soon, he could have some real issues because once you get a reputation in recruiting circles for having a program in decline, it's tough to reverse. To be clear, I think highly of Trevor Adair and think he'll pull Clemson out of this rut. But, I think his margin for error shrinks with every underachieving year.
Interesting you should mention it that way. Checking Clemson's fortunes from the most recent soccerratings.com, it looks like this: Year....Rank 2004...#61 2003...#32 2002...#8 2001...#7 2000...#10 Something's surely happened between 2002 and 2004.
Unfortunately for Clemson the word is already out in the circle that many players have left the program due to management style from Adair. It doesn't help either that he has tried to play an easier non conference schedule and have posted bad results over the past two years. At any rate the bottom line is the players you recruit...it seems that they might have spent lots of scholarship $$ on a couple of foreigner players that have been an absolute bust! Also, I was told that he lost all three assistant coaches the past two years. This breaks and affects the program's continuity. What is interesting is that I was told non of these assistants went on to coach in college! I agree with Sandon. Adair's window to produce is shortening and fast. A few years back I think they got new AD. Time to go to work!
And he lost his long time assistant Todd Bramble in 2000 (now Clemson's women's coach), who was responsible for recruiting a number of the impact players who contributed to Clemson's pre-2003 successes (such as they were).
Adair's job security is rock solid. 2 ACC titles and deep runs into the NCAAs give no cause for concern. This year and last year were bad years with untimely injuries to Steven Rhyne, Charlie Roberts, Stuart Holden and others hurting them. There are certainly some attacking deficiencies that need to be addressed and you can't lose three good coaches without there being some time allowed for changeover with 2003-2004 are those years. There is no way Adair will let the first losing season in Clemson history have any flowover to next year. Having a bad year in the ACC means at least 5 losses in conference and Clemson paid the price for an inability to score goals in big matches.
Re: I think you missed part of my point They ate his lunch? Is that some kind of sexual reference? So you watched Charlie Morgan or Bruce Murray coach in Atlanta, they never played for Trevor, they played for Ibe and I doubt either of them would say they gained a great deal of tactical awareness from him. Your use of terms like "half court defense" and "turnovers" is very astute. I think next year Clemson should use the box and one and look to use a motion offense instead of merely posting up and running hi-low screens. Clemson did give up 28 goals this year but also gave up 22 when they won the ACC Tournament and made it all the way to the Elite 8 in 2001. The difference was goal scoring and anyone who saw Clemson play will tell you that. In 2001 they gave up one goal to South Carolina and won. In 2004 they gave up one goal to South Carolina and lost. In 2001 they scored one goal against Wake Forest and won. In 2004 they scored one goal against Wake Forest and lost. There are many examples that all come back to goal scoring but thanks for your advice John Wooden.
Clemson in 2002 Just to let you know, Clemson gave up more goals in 2002 than they did this year on their way to the Elite 8.
Re: Clemson in 2002 Agree. Defense isn't their problem. I think the points aobut assistants and recruiting are good points. The level of players in the college game has improved greatly in the past four years but Clemson is still playing with the "hustle" type players. Clemson is tough and willing to do what it takes to win but they need to be able to play combination ball on the ground. Their inside game is lacking with Ogunsula, et. al. having injuries and the rest of the players not being able to pick it up. Today's college players are much better at playing good soccer, UVA's freshman mid being a good example (I forget his name), and Clemson needs to get that kind of player and play that kind of game.