Moou would be fuels to leave asheshe, they got it made…same reason Bowden joined…
- Thread starter CockofEarle
- Start date
I do not want to see clemson join, however I would like to see them play Alabama more frequently. looking at this video, it looks like clemson use to wear red?
Had they joined 10 years ago they don’t have 2 NC. They wouldn’t even have 2 SEC titles.
Maybe, but they would benefit with the SEC payout. How significate that would be, I do not know.
On the flip side, you could make the argument they might have more than 2. They would have won in 2018 and likely 2016 based on them beating Bama those years for the title. In 2015 they would have played Bama in the SEC champ game with a healthy Shaq Lawson and McKenzie Alexander. Shoot, even in 2017 they could have played Bama during the regular season when Bama had a ton of injuries (Bama didnt even make SEC Champ game). Or maybe Clemson would have had more injuries from the SEC grind. Hard to know. They definitely would have won in 2018 though. That team was insane.
Why wouldn't they have two titles? They beat Bama for both of those national championships, and Bama won the SEC those years. Not sure I follow your logic, who in the SEC would have beat them?
If you look at the groundwork of how Clemson built those teams, you have to go back 10+ years ago at it's roots. They were recruiting off of winning very weak conference titles and being rewarded with BCS bowls when barely ranked in the top 10 or 15.
Those Clemson teams would have been no better than mid to upper mid level SEC teams. They would have won exactly zero titles and would have struggled to recruit anywhere near the level they did. Just an opinion but they would have lost a lot more games with a much more difficult schedule, and would have struggled to attract the level of recruits they were able to by winning a bad conference.
That's assumptions, what I am stating is fact. They beat the SEC champions for their two national titles, so I simply posed the question who would have derailed them and prevented those titles.
A lot harder to build going 8-4 than 12-2.
It’s a benefit to win a conference title, and a BCS (at the time a huge deal)when you can’t even win your state. Those conference titles were recruiting ammo no matter how they did against us. An SEC schedule back then would surely produce worse records for them. No doubt.
Then the build wouldn’t have happened as easily. That’s why I said what I said.
Well we will never know for sure, they got several big name players before they won the ACC and if they join the SEC now, I don't believe they are a program that will have a significant decline. People also discount how they have some of the top coordinators in the country who stick around inexplicably, that doesn't hurt recruiting either having a consistent staff.
Yes, they beat the SEC champ in those individual games, but what would have likely derailed their SEC hopes is a road game at Ole Miss following big emotional SEC win, or a loss during a three-game stretch against top 5 teams Georgia, LSU, and Florida, or something similar. It's one thing to look at a 12 game schedule and say that you are better than every team on the list. It's quite another to say you would beat them all.
That is not to imply that Clemson isn't an elite team, but there's no question that to win the playoff, you have to be in the playoff and the ACC gives Clemson an easier path to that goal.
LOL at emotional OLe MIss win. both 2016 and 2018 Clemzen would have boat raced them by 20.
Yet Alabama, who they beat in both those championships navigated the SEC just fine in those years. That's flawed thinking, the team that won both against the tide would have struggled more than the tide to reach the playoffs. Do I have that right?
I understand your point that season after season playing a tougher schedule matters, but the 2016 and 2019 teams would have blasted through the SEC just like Bama did.
Clemson would be banged up from the SEC schedule. Bama and Auburn, UF, UGA, UK ….the East…..and a rotating West?
I see a consistent 1-3 losses per year when they got there 2 nattys.
I see a consistent 1-3 losses per year when they got there 2 nattys.
Not when they won those two, they were definetly better than the best the SEC had to offer. Your nuts if you think a team that beat Bama by almost 3 TDs in 2019 would have lost up to 3 sec games, that's laughable.
They would be beat up and down with our schedule. What happened against LSU, to your point.
Nobody was beating LSU with Burrows and those receivers. But again, those 2016 and 2019 teams had first rounders throughout, they would not have been beat up and down with our schedule in those years.
But it happened. That’s on Clemson.
Anyway, we are talking about the past, friend.
I didn't say anything about an emotional Ole Miss team. At any rate, it was a hypothetical example, harkening back to Alabama's loss to Ole Miss in 2015 when Alabama went on to win the national championship (and beat Clemson). I'm sure when Alabama fans looked at their schedule that year and circled the "big" games, Ole Miss probably wasn't one of them. I'm sure it ranked behind Georgia, Texas A&M, LSU, Auburn, and the SECCG (Florida), all of which Alabama won easily (you might say they boat raced those teams). But Ole Miss was a good team and when you play enough good teams, sooner or later, somebody beats you. It's simple statistics.
But like I said, it's a hypothetical example. If you play an SEC schedule, you will play more teams capable of beating elite teams on any given day than you would playing an ACC schedule. It could just as easily be Texas A&M (Alabama lost to them in 2012 and went on to win the NC), Auburn (Alabama lost to them in 2017 and went on to win the national title), or LSU (Alabama lost to them in 2011 and went on to win the national title).
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
I had to listen to Todd Ellis for a few minutes before I got to the TV...
- Latest: WhereOurMoneyGo