The plot thickens

The dominant subplot entering today's game in Greensboro is undoubtedly the NCAA Tournament at-large bid that appears to be at stake.

Monumental stuff, no doubt. And yesterday's wins by Colorado and Michigan State heighten the tension even more between Clemson and Boston College.

But by now you've probably heard plenty about the "Last four in," the "First four out" and what Joe Lunardi ate for breakfast this morning (I'm thinking he's a Kix guy).

Here's a theme that hasn't been discussed much lately: Clemson's alleged penchant for wilting late in the season in recent years, and whether we'll see something different this time.

I say "alleged" because the three straight early NCAA Tournament ousters have overshadowed everything else, cementing the perception that the dead-legged Tigers have done nothing but stink it up late in the season.

Perception is a bit different from reality.

Last year, in early March we were talking about how hot the Tigers were as the regular season neared its conclusion. Clemson won five of six games heading into its finale at Wake Forest. The Tigers lost that game, lost to N.C. State in the first round of the ACC Tournament, then fell to Missouri in the first round of the NCAA Tournament.

Two years ago, the Tigers closed the regular season with a 3-3 record in their last six games. Then they fell to Georgia Tech in the first round of the ACC Tournament before losing to Michigan in the first round of the NCAA's.

Three years ago, Clemson won five of its last six games to close the regular season -- capped by an emotional one-point victory over Virginia Tech on Senior Day. The Tigers then made a rare and stirring run in the ACC Tournament, beating Boston College and Duke before falling by five points to North Carolina in the final. Then they squandered an 18-point lead to Villanova in the first round of the NCAA Tournament.

The NCAA duds were no doubt disappointing, particularly given that each one of them came at the hands of lower-seeded teams. But I'm going to need some convincing to subscribe to the popular perception that Clemson simply ran out of gas late in the past three seasons.

What happens in Greensboro, and what happens in the NCAA Tournament (assuming the Tigers get there) could end up solidifying or chipping away at that perception.

I've gone on record as saying this season will be classified as a success regardless of what happens from this point. Twenty wins and a 9-7 record is just a fantastic achievement for Brad Brownell and his staff, and the memory of this year's achievements could end up providing some comfort to fans next season if the Tigers take a dip without Demontez Stitt and Jerai Grant.

But if the Tigers don't grab a win or two this week and next, the disappointment would be magnified because of the past three years; since the exhilarating win over Duke in the ACC semifinals three years ago, Clemson has lost six consecutive postseason games -- the last five to double-digit seeds.

Over their last six regular-season games, the Tigers won three and lost three. Certainly the vibes are good after a spirited, gritty effort last week at Duke and an excellent showing at home against Virginia Tech six days ago. But vibes can change quickly depending on the result, and we've seen that plenty this season.

There's also the style-of-play issue, and the idea that this program is much more suited to postseason success under Brownell than Purnell because Brownell's teams don't run and press. This year's team is demonstrably better than Purnell's teams were in the area of halfcourt offense and defense, and the thinking is that'll produce more success this time of year given that so many games are tight, low-scoring affairs.

Brownell has already excited his fans and made them happy about the present and future under his leadership. Hard to imagine that many people in orange are wistful for the old days under Purnell at this point.

But by reversing the Tigers' recent postseason trend, Brownell can make an emphatic statement that he's an upgrade over his predecessor.

LW