I think ECU and Vandy outplayed us this year. WCU came damn close. Too close.
Dabo's rant never felt more true......
- Thread starter RaleighGC
- Start date
- Status
The pre-season narrative on Clemson for the past 2 seasons has been...
"Yeah but, they lost so much talent to the NFL, it's doubtful they'll be as good this year."
2 years in a row they have proven that narrative to be incorrect. Next year the losses will include more offensive than defensive players. But their backups and incoming freshmen are pretty damn good, just like in the previous 2 years. Clemson's strength seems to be in their depth. No single player makes them good, on either side of the ball. They currently are a complete team, similar to Alabama.
You'd be foolish to assume a drop-off until you see it happen.
They have a huge advantage. Level of competition. You can downplay it all you want, but it matters. Its why they suck at bssketball. It's not becsuse they don't care. It's Because they can't compete in the elite confrence in the country period. If UNC,Duke, Pitt., syrscuse, Louisville, and Virginia played football like they do basketball it would be a different story. Plus throw in FSU who does play at a high level. Also, if clempson is fortunate enough to lose to Bama again this year, time to start reminding them you would NEVER win the SEC if you can't beat Bama.
Difference is Watson leaves. They can talk about another 5 star bought and paid for like Willie Corn, but if you think clempson has another Watson to start next year get some meds.
I can't wait until its over this year and they realize if it can't happen with this team and the best QB we've had by miles it's never happening. The system doesn't allow you to skate throuh a acc schedule like 81 that had nobody. FSU wasn't a member of the acc then and allow no 1 to play no 4 for a national title. Those days are over. You may not have to play in the SEC, but you still must go through Bama for a title.
I don't know who will start for Clemson at QB next season. But they will have four 4-star players and one 5-star player competing for the position. I would bet the one who wins the job will do fine with all the talented WRs and RBs on the roster.
Zerrick Cooper is probably this best qb on the team second to Watson ,bigger and faster and a cannon for an arm no he's no Watson but very capable of being a great qb. RB loaded ,wr loaded ,no drop off any time soon
F all this. I loved the 5 in a row and I didn't need catching up on the all time record to feel that way. As far as all that money and effort on a coach, forgive me, but it's not like Clemp's son has done anything like that for its last few coaches either. When we recruit at or near their level we win or will win our fair share. It's that freakin' simple. To hell with Dabo, forever, for the rant and to hell with anybody who supports it or runs down my University like he did. And finally to hell with anyone who spews BS propaganda supporting the enemy which is exactly what those asshats are and will always be.
Well-written post.
I see it this exact same way.
By the definition of legacy, in this context, I see only Bama as being at that point today.
tOSU keeps hinting at it, but they're not quite in "dynasty mode" like Bama - yet (although I think they're the closest right now).
I'd also agree Clemson isn't in that blue-blood/legacy category yet. To reach that, I'd think we'd have to have a few more years of consistent CFP appearances, and win at least one NC along the way. Will we make it (?) - only the coaching staff's ability to attract and develop talent will tell....
For now, top-echelon/top-tier seems to be a better descriptor.
We beat them once since the 63-17 game before the streak started. 5 years. Muschamp can't wait that long cause he will be gone.
As I said before, show me a Heisman or a national championship that even Bowden or Dabo helped create during their tenure. "Top echelon" or "Legacy programs" I don't know about. Racism, buying dim witted players,rich uncles,Tillman Hall, Death Sentence recruitment offences where Clemmons is concerned we all know about.Blue Blood??? just one man's semantics...along with "powerhouse"
I understand the frustration. it's difficult to accept getting mauled by Clemson. Then we look at Virginia Tech, who hired Justin Fuente, have first year success and make it to the ACC championship game. I believe in Muschamp though, because of the work effort I see this staff exhibiting in recruiting. It will not happen overnight, but we will find success again and soon.
I'll say it again it is all about recruiting. That goes for players and coaches. Dabo is a great recruiter, have no idea about the intricacies of the game. He recruited coaches, fired the ones that didn't work out. I just hope that CWM will see and take action if some coaches are hurting the program. I'm afraid he is friends with Roper and even Elliot.
Their 3rd string / scout team was whipping us in the 4th...
Just here to chime in, Carolina needs a star like CJ Spiller was for us. Once you prove you can pull big name recruits, it all starts to fall into place.
Clemson's FANS might care about football but the University isn't as interested as ours is. Folks need to remember they hired their current head coach primarily because it was the most inexpensive option because they were still paying Bowden. It's just about the only time in the history of college football that an interim coach was successful. And when Dabo had lost two to us and went out to get a new OC, Chad Morris wasn't sought after or particularly wanted.. he was one year removed from being a High School coach. Brent Venebles was fired at OU before coming to Clemson. When Morris left, Dabo promoted dudes that played there and were just hanging around on the tertiary coaching staff to replace him. They've made moves REPEATEDLY that are the epitome of nepotistic, small-time football programs and it's worked like gangbusters. I don't know how you explain it but let's not act like it was some grand plan that Terry Don and Dabo had back in 08.
Good lord, we did that but afterwards we decided to go play golf and not do that anymore.
QUOTE="justanothertiger, post: 3010818, member: 102092"]Just here to chime in, Carolina needs a star like CJ Spiller was for us. Once you prove you can pull big name recruits, it all starts to fall into place.[/QUOTE]
QUOTE="justanothertiger, post: 3010818, member: 102092"]Just here to chime in, Carolina needs a star like CJ Spiller was for us. Once you prove you can pull big name recruits, it all starts to fall into place.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, so now you have to start over from the beginning. Also, your entire athletic administration is based on the buddy-system, terrible way to go about things. I'd be calling for the firing of Ray Tanner in addition to other coaches if I were a coot.
Take a deep breath and relax. It is all about the $$$$$ and recruiting. If we had the Alabama/Auburn/LSU/FSU/UGA/Clemson handshakes we could sign 3-4 5* and 10-12 4* every year. Those handshakes make a difference. An 18-19 year old coming in for a visit and heading home with a couple thousand dollars in their pocket instead of memories of a few old Farts telling them how much we need them would be more inclined to commit. It would produce a much greater return on investment than $50,000 of white towels each year.If a kid gets $2000 and chooses another school that is the cost of doing business.
Our roads are the worst in the country because we refuse to pay the gas tax to improve them. We can fix the roads with $.10/gal tax. We can fix the recruiting with a few folded bills.
Our roads are the worst in the country because we refuse to pay the gas tax to improve them. We can fix the roads with $.10/gal tax. We can fix the recruiting with a few folded bills.
Venebles left OU because Bob Stoops brought Mike Stoops back as co-defensive coordinator after he failed as a head coach.
Neopotism rarely works out in college coach personnel decisions as we know all too well. Glad Muschamp doesn't have any relatives on the payroll.
If Venebles had been doing at OU what he is doing at Clemson I still think he'd be there. I get what you are saying but my point was there was NOTHING in his track record that suggested he would do what he is doing at Clemson.
Wow, that's a lot of text, but lets talk about it. I'd bold some of your more questionable statements for discussion:
This is why they cannot compete against the Michigan,s, the Alabama,s or the West Virginia,s at crunch time and they never will.
The WV game was an ass whipping of epic proportions. I felt then probably about like you feel right now. Since then, Clemson beat LSU, Ohio State, and Oklahoma (twice) in bowl games. That's getting it done by anyone's estimation.
When they begin to have four to six top twenty five teams on their schedule, then will they be able to prove they are for real and not paper tigers to the nation. Ok, Auburn, Louisville, FSU, Virginia Tech. That's 4.
Look man, Clemson is not as good as Bama. They weren't as good last year either. No one is questioning that. If Clemson faces Bama again this year, they will have no better than a puncher's chance to win. Just like last year. College football is divided in two. There's Alabama and there's Not Alabama. That program is on a different level. But to say Clemson is not one of the top 5 or so teams in the country is just plain silly. While I agree that from an historical perspective that Clemson is not in that "perennial blueblood" list, it's pretty difficult to argue that Clemson isn't on par with Ohio State, Michigan, and the other top programs that aren't Bama. Will it last? Who knows? Clemson will have to stay at the current level, with little drop off for a number of years (and in my opinion, find a way to steal a NC from Bama) to really be considered elite for the long term.
And let me tell you man. That SEC is so mighty argument is not the argument it used to be... This was absolutely true during the 2000s. But that was a few years ago. Let's talk about the SEC that doesn't include Bama:
1. Assuming Bama beats UF this weekend, there's no team not coached by Saban that has less than 4 losses (BUT WAIT... SEC teams beat each other up).
2. Every team in the SEC not named Bama went 5-9 out of conference against power 5 schools.
3. Every team is the SEC not coached by Saban went 0-6 against the current AP top 15. Let that sink in... 0-6.
There are some really good football programs in the SEC (particularly the West), and overall, I'd still say that the SEC is the top conference overall. But to say that the SEC as a whole is the indisputable, dominate force in college football is a stretch at this point. I'd think that if Clemson played LSU right now, they'd win by 3 scores.
He's not Spurrier. He'll get four or five years to show what he can do, though, starting with the one just past.
Because of their great success throughout their long history, as well as their relevance during modern times (though any team might have some off years), Ohio State is a legacy program. Michigan is a legacy program because they have more wins than any program in history and are relevant today. Southern Cal is a legacy program based on championship heritage going back to the 1930s and I expect they will reassert themselves. Notre Dame is a legacy program, despite their miseries this year, based on the number of national championships they have won, and they will reassert themselves or give up football altogether. Texas is a legacy program that is struggling to find its footing. Oklahoma is a legacy program.
Neither Florida not Florida State go back far enough, even though they both have more than one national championship. FSU didn't even play football until 1948. UPC is certainly a top-echelon program now, and their ability continue in that vain, and whether they win multiple championships - they already have one - will determine legacy status for them sometime in the future.
I don't disagree with any of that, I just don't consider historical performance much of an indicator of where a program is today (like Michigan winning games pre-1948).
There may be some value from such a global perspective, but I generally only go back 10-ish years and look a program's more recent significance.
That's how I arrived at Bama, tOSU on the fringe, and all others on the outside looking in.
Just keep in mind what a legacy program is. Think New York Yankees. These are the most successful schools over the longest periods of time. Top echelon relates to the present and recent past.
Again, not necessarily disagreeing with the concept, just stating that the "blue-blood" concept of a team with a 100-ish year history (even with some periods of domination in the past) isn't worth a significant amount of consideration if they've not made an impact in the more recent past (10-ish years).
But just about all the legacy teams have - as recently as the BCS era. You're primarily disagreeing because, at best, your program would need to win another couple of national championships and maintain excellence over another couple of decades to become a legacy program. Don't attack the concept. Legacy programs exist and discerning people know who they are.
What make you think it will take two generations to catch Clemson? We are not committed to football? Look at the capital investment we have made. We have already passed the Tigers here.As we speak, Muschamp is neck and neck with Swinney in recruiting. Spurrier was in a much greater mess than Boom and it did not take long to over take the big ORANGE suckers.
Clemson will rapidly fall back to being ACC Clemson "Clemsoning" next year. All this blue blood, elite, legacy BS is just BS.
So we spend the money, make the upgrades needed, and your take away is that it's too late. Got it. Ask Oregon about the ups and downs of football. They spend millions a game to change their unis. Hows that worked out the past two years. No if you want to say we should have spent the money sooner.........then okay. But to intimate it's "too late" makes me think you have the motives of a tater trying to post a negative infomercial. They are a better program right now, 3 years ago they weren't. So we can either catch back up or shut up.
And BTW, Saban ain't leaving Bama for SC, Harbaugh is not leaving the school he played at with a rich tradition to come to SC, and you will see the Herman myth play out in a couple of years.
I'm not sure I can differentiate sooner and too late so yes, we entered the "arms race" too late and should have invested the money sooner considering we joined the premiere conference of college football 25 years ago. Additionally I noted in the original post that the coaching names were not the point it was the fact that we didn't try to lure a proven program changing coach. Granted there might be <10 out there......I hope Muschamp is the guy, he appeared pretty POd at the post game presser which is great to see.
I hope you're right. It's possible. Look at Oregon and Baylor and TCU and Auburn. All of them were the toast of the college football world a short time ago and all have declined a bit. Hell, look at us. Next season will reveal a whole lot about the direction of both programs.
Well yeah, so now you have to start over from the beginning. Also, your entire athletic administration is based on the buddy-system, terrible way to go about things. I'd be calling for the firing of Ray Tanner in addition to other coaches if I were a coot.[/QUOTE]
But you're a Tater so ....
Being a defensive coordinator in the Big IX is like being a firefighter in hell.
- Status
Similar threads
