ADVERTISEMENT

Klempsuxx has another weak....

2014? Six SEC teams finished in the top-25, including 2 in the top-10 and 4 in the top-15. 2018? again, 8 teams finishing in the top-25 with 3 of them in the top-10 and another at ll. I really would like to know what it is that make you think those were bad years for the conference. In the ACC's best season they only finished with 4 teams in the top-25

The topic wasn't how many teams finished in the top 25. The topic was how many teams were worth talking about - as in, "how many teams have a chance to win the SEC." For most the last ten years, Alabama was clearly the best team, head and shoulders above the rest. Nobody was talking about a #24 Florida a few years ago, except maybe Florida and USC fans.
 
2014? Six SEC teams finished in the top-25, including 2 in the top-10 and 4 in the top-15. 2018? again, 8 teams finishing in the top-25 with 3 of them in the top-10 and another at ll. I really would like to know what it is that make you think those were bad years for the conference. In the ACC's best season they only finished with 4 teams in the top-25

I was responding to someone else's question. I dont think the topic was if the SEC had a bad year, it was if there was another team in the conference "worth talking about" from a national title contender standpoint. It was all Bama in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2018.
 
The joke of Clemsux schedule is on their fans. Look at that home schedule...bwahahaha. I wouldn't even bring out the small Coleman grill for any of those. Can you imagine paying for those season tickets for those "big time names" to come to town?
 
The topic wasn't how many teams finished in the top 25. The topic was how many teams were worth talking about - as in, "how many teams have a chance to win the SEC." For most the last ten years, Alabama was clearly the best team, head and shoulders above the rest. Nobody was talking about a #24 Florida a few years ago, except maybe Florida and USC fans.
Wow. You just enlightened me. I didn't realize that finishing in the top-10 was nothing to talk about.
 
Go back to the post you were commenting on. Then read it.
I did. The poster asked what year was Alabama the only team worth talking about. Anytime a team finishes in the top-10 it's worth talking about. Just because teams didn't play in BCS games doesn't mean they weren't worth talking about. In case you don't remember Conference champions were designated to play in those games even if there were other more deserving teams ranked ahead of them that didn't win their conference. In 2013 both South Carolina and Missouri were ranked 8 and 9 before the bowl games. South Carolina had just thumped Clemson by two TDs who was sitting outside of the top-10. Yet they got the automatic bid because they won their little shitty conference. South Carolina and Missouri finished that season ranked 4 and 5. Carolina beat 2 teams that won BCS games that season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigTomE
I did. The poster asked what year was Alabama the only team worth talking about. Anytime a team finishes in the top-10 it's worth talking about. Just because teams didn't play in BCS games doesn't mean they weren't worth talking about. In case you don't remember Conference champions were designated to play in those games even if there were other more deserving teams ranked ahead of them that didn't win their conference. In 2013 both South Carolina and Missouri were ranked 8 and 9 before the bowl games. South Carolina had just thumped Clemson by two TDs who was sitting outside of the top-10. Yet they got the automatic bid because they won their little shitty conference. South Carolina and Missouri finished that season ranked 4 and 5. Carolina beat 2 teams that won BCS games that season.

No, not really.
Neither ever had any real shot of winning the SEC. Plus USC was on probation.
 
Last edited:
How the narrative changes over time.

When Miami and VaTech were added, it was structured in such a way as to set up a FSU/Miami ACCCG every year. They were powers at the time so that was the assumed outcome. Nobody expected they'd both go in the toilet at the same time.

They can't change the conference they are in (not easily anyway). Back when we won the SEC East, nobody around here (well, I wasn't here, but I was on CT and I assume it was largely the same) was saying our berth in the SECCG was somehow illegitimate b/c the East was crap that year. Maybe there were a few on CT, but they were banned in short order for expressing the opinion.

I get it: the ACC is weak. What's Clemson supposed to do about it? People talk about it like it's somehow Clemson's doing; as if they've nefariously engineered from behind the scenes the downfall of other ACC teams. For a while, Bama was the only school worth talking about from the SEC. It cycles. FSU will eventually get back, and may have already been back if not for the horrible Taggart hire. VaTech will come back. Things will look different.

And then people post about their released schedule as if it's news? We already largely know what their schedule is going to be this year and the year after and the year after and the year after.

Nobody said it was clem's fault. But good job defending them as always. It says something when lurking taters like your posts more than Gamecocks.
 
SEC win % from 2019:

Clemson: .667
USC: .375
We get it, you love clem. We allow clem fans here. (A lot more so than any clem board allows USC fans) You don't have to hide behind sayings like, "When WE won the east..." Come on man. Defend your team and be honest about your loyalty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uscedge21
And of course the ACC gave Clemson the week off before their only "big game" on their schedule. It's all a joke, but until people stand up and demand that SOS count more, nothing will change.
 
We had a few scholarships removed but there weren't any post season bans.

The point is that unless you are a fan of one of the also-rans for conference or playoff/BCS contention, you don’t really talk about them. In 2013, people talked about Clemson as a contender (at #3) for half the season until the FSU blowout. Meanwhile, USC was out of the top ten for the majority of the season, and only rose to #4 after the season was over because the higher ranked teams playing much tougher bowl opponents lost. The only time that people talked about USC was after they beat #4/6 Clemson. They were talking about us the week before because we still had a slim chance at the BCS game before that game.
 
The point is that unless you are a fan of one of the also-rans for conference or playoff/BCS contention, you don’t really talk about them. In 2013, people talked about Clemson as a contender (at #3) for half the season until the FSU blowout. Meanwhile, USC was out of the top ten for the majority of the season, and only rose to #4 after the season was over because the higher ranked teams playing much tougher bowl opponents lost. The only time that people talked about USC was after they beat #4/6 Clemson. They were talking about us the week before because we still had a slim chance at the BCS game before that game.
That season USC was a contender to win the East so evidently they were worth talking about and was in the top-10 before they played their bowl game. Clemson was completely destroyed by FSU in the middle of October and were out of the NC conversation for the little under a half of the regular season. Clemson was out of the top-10 all-together after they got thumped again by USC. We both finished with the exact same record except we actually beat quite a few ranked teams while Clemson had 1 victory over a ranked opponent before their bowl game.
 
That season USC was a contender to win the East so evidently they were worth talking about and was in the top-10 before they played their bowl game. Clemson was completely destroyed by FSU in the middle of October and were out of the NC conversation for the little under a half of the regular season. Clemson was out of the top-10 all-together after they got thumped again by USC. We both finished with the exact same record except we actually beat quite a few ranked teams while Clemson had 1 victory over a ranked opponent before their bowl game.

Check again. Clemson was 4th in the coaches poll before the loss to USC. We were in the conversation, barely. USC was already an afterthought and shocked everyone with that win.

If USC had played a team of similar calibre to OSU in the outhouse bowl, they might have lost and ended up ranked 15 or so. Instead, they got lowly Wisconsin while everybody else played better opponents.

Had to check myself. USC had only one ranked win before Clemson. Clemson one ranked win over UGA, who then blew out USC. Big fight between girls’ schools. SECE was total garbage that year.
 
Last edited:
Check again. Clemson was 4th in the coaches poll before the loss to USC. We were in the conversation, barely. USC was already an afterthought and shocked everyone with that win.

If USC had played a team of similar calibre to OSU in the outhouse bowl, they might have lost and ended up ranked 15 or so. Instead, they got lowly Wisconsin while everybody else played better opponents.

Had to check myself. USC had only one ranked win before Clemson. Clemson one ranked win over UGA, who then blew out USC. Big fight between girls’ schools. SECE was total garbage that year.
Who was shocked by USC beating Clemson that year? I think Herbstreit was the only one on the panel that picked Clemson. USC was ranked 10th and playing at home and had beaten higher ranked Clemson each of the previous 4 seasons. According to ESPN Clemson was ranked 6th when they played us. Wisconsin was far from a slouch when we played them. They lost 3 games, none by more than 7 points including the game against OSU. We beat them by 10. Not sure beating OSU would have been much tougher. We beat both Clemson and Central Florida who both won BCS bowls.
 
Who was shocked by USC beating Clemson that year? I think Herbstreit was the only one on the panel that picked Clemson. USC was ranked 10th and playing at home and had beaten higher ranked Clemson each of the previous 4 seasons. According to ESPN Clemson was ranked 6th when they played us. Wisconsin was far from a slouch when we played them. They lost 3 games, none by more than 7 points including the game against OSU. We beat them by 10. Not sure beating OSU would have been much tougher. We beat both Clemson and Central Florida who both won BCS bowls.

Every college football fan without a chicken on their baseball cap. USC had only beaten one decent team, an overrated Missouri in OT, and had lost to a decent Georgia team (the only other ranked team they played) and a horrible Tennessee team. Wisconsin was crap that year. I've lived in Big 10 country for over 25 years and know crap when I see it. But USC was way better that day than I expected. I wonder a lot about those days when we couldn't get as many highly rated recruits. What would have happened if we dropped the admission standards way down to USC or UGA levels?
 
This statement holds no logic! When exactly did it hurt them in the playoff? They beat Oklahoma substantially in 15 and then lost a close one to Bama in the championship in which Saban had to resort to trick plays/onside kick. 16 they blew out OSU 31-0 and then beat Bama. 17 beat by bama in the first round. Last year Blew out ND and Bama. This year beat OSU and then lost in the National Championship game to a better LSU team?

So please explain to me how it has hurt them?

Last year the logic was they played a weak schedule so they were able to beat up on ND and Bama because they played a tough schedule and were "tired" this year it is they play a weak schedule so they were not prepared for the playoff. Which is it?

Weak schedule/Clemson = not prepared. Tough schedule/LSU = battle hardened.

I’ll let you know next year how to interpret Clemson’s weak schedule. You have to understand that things in college football are fluid. For instance, if OBJ gives LSU players money on national TV you should laugh and be happy that he stuck it to the taters SEC style, and what OBJ is doing is good for college football because he is sticking it to the NCaas. you need to understand that this incident that occurred in the national title game shows that Newspring church is obviously paying far more money than OBJ and is the sole reason why they get 5 star recruits over teams like LSU, Florida, auburn, Georgia, etc.. also the Taters should be given the death penalty. it’s science bro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cfbfan15
South Carolina needs to focus on not being one of the weakest teams that Clemson plays.

Hurting the strength of schedule.

The closest spread on an ACC game Clemson had this year was -24.5 point. We are the least of your worries when it comes to strength of schedule. Your entire conference is a dumpster fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USC15
The joke of Clemsux schedule is on their fans. Look at that home schedule...bwahahaha. I wouldn't even bring out the small Coleman grill for any of those. Can you imagine paying for those season tickets for those "big time names" to come to town?

Yep,its great to bring out the big grill to watch us get housed by The Citadel and App State's of the world. We can laugh at the schedule but dabo and them folks are laughing way harder at our athletic dept.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rickbryan
Maybe because we played them at home and the ACC Championship was at a neutral site
2018 we played them in their house.and played them closer than the ACC Coastal champion.
2017 we also played them closer than the ACC Coastal champion.
ACC is a one team conference. The rest of the conference is terrible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A_F_Deerhunter
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT