C's Offense: "ACC is weaker" and RClark's "It's for weaker personnel" do not make sense

Ryan Clark says that Canada's offense is for a team with "weaker personnel." Now applying elementary logic, whatever offense you are running, if "weaker personnel" can run it successfully, then more talented personnel should run the offense even better. If not, why not?

I've seen a lot of posts dredging up the excuse that "the ACC is weaker than the SEC." Well, first of all, that's debatable in 2017.

But for the sake of argument, let's say the ACC is considerably weaker than the SEC. Who have we played so far that are SEC powerhouses?

Mississippi State is an SEC creampuff, as their performances after they waxed us show. They stopped this offense. Syracuse and Troy State are hardly "SEC" and Canada's offense looked bad.

How did Canada take his offense and ring up points against Clemson like a Winn Dixie cashier ringing up five baskets of groceries? Are we saying LSU can't run an offense successfully that Pitt could run? Why, if that's the case?

Either 1) This is not Canada's offense or 2) LSU cannot run an offense that Pitt could run and we'd be better off wholesale trading our personnel for Pitt's 2016 offense. I thought Canada was salivating about running his offense with LSU's talent.

I guess a third alternative would be they haven't learned it yet, but what the hell have they been doing all spring and summer?

But for reasons above, the "ACC defenses are weaker" and "this offense is for inferior teams" just do not make sense.