Ray's letter from a clemson stand point

[Langamecock]

Vandervort | 1 hour ago

I’m often asked by those who are not from the state of South Carolina on what is the difference between Clemson’s football program and South Carolina’s.

They have asked me, why has Clemson had so much success in football over the years, and why South Carolina has not?

My answer to them is simple. Clemson people have never been satisfied.

I bring this up because of the letter written by South Carolina athletic director Ray Tanner to Gamecock fans.



Obviously, I don’t know the reason for Tanner’s letter. I’m sure he has a very good reason for it. I’m sure he is showing his support for his head football coach. I don’t understand why he felt the need to do that just two years in Will Muschamp’s tenure.

Is he just reassuring Gamecock fans he made the right hire, or is he really satisfied?

While South Carolina seems to be satisfied with going to the Outback Bowl almost every year, its rival is heading to its third straight College Football Playoff.

The Outback Bowl—South Carolina’s fifth trip to the Tamp area bowl game since 2000—and the Capital One Bowl are perhaps the two best bowl games the Carolina football program has ever been to. Maybe back in the day the Gamecocks four appearances in the old Gator Bowl and the 2010 Chick-fil-A Bowl, were considered good bowls, too. But they have never played in what is considered one of the major bowl games or what we now know as the New Year’s Six.

A South Carolina football team has never played in a Cotton Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl or Rose Bowl. Now, technically, they have played in the Peach Bowl (a.k.a Chick-fil-A Bowl), but that was before the Peach Bowl obtained elite bowl status as a New Year’s Six Bowl Game.

As for Clemson, the Tigers will be making their second trip to the Sugar Bowl on New Year’s Day where they will play No. 4 Alabama as part of the College Football Playoff Semifinals. It will mark Clemson’s 12th appearance in what is considered a major bowl game.

If you want to go ahead and give the Gamecocks credit for their two Peach Bowl/Chick-fil-A Bowl appearances, then go ahead. However, while you are doing that, go ahead and add Clemson’s eight visits to that bowl game as well.

As I wrote the Sugar Bowl will be Clemson’s second appearance in the New Orleans’ based bowl game, while it has also played in six Orange Bowls, the Fiesta Bowl, the Cotton Bowl and two College Football Playoff National Championship Games, which the NCAA recognizes a major bowl game as well.

If you are doing the math that is 12 Major Bowl game appearances for Clemson and none for South Carolina.

Granted the Gamecocks have had some good football teams over the years. Georgia Rogers won the Heisman Trophy in 1980, they had the Black Magic Year in 1984, of course Steve Spurrier’s three straight 11-win teams (2011-’13) and the one SEC East Championship (2010).

But the program has not won a conference championship since 1969, and that was back when it was in the ACC. By the way, after Saturday’s third straight ACC Championship, the Tigers have now won 23 conference titles over the years.

That is the difference between Clemson and South Carolina, and not just right now, but always. While the Gamecocks are satisfied with another 8-win season, Clemson is playing for an opportunity to win another national championship.

Granted, Clemson has not always played for a national championship, but in the years they weren’t, they were not satisfied. If you don’t believe me, then ask Tommy Bowden, Tommy West and Ken Hatfield.

 

[cofcgamecock9]

Look, I get what you are saying and you may be correct on some of your points, but overall I would say you are cherry picking data and your post is a little misleading.

Comparing the "satisfaction" level at SC to the "satisfaction" level at Clemson when they were getting ready to fire Tommy Bowden is apples to oranges.
In your post, you say that Clemson is never "satisfied."

Well you didn't mention how Clemson felt after year two of Dabo's tenure. This would be a much better comparison compared to what they thought regarding Tommy Bowden.

Clemson went 5 years not beating SC. Dabo went 6-7 in 2010 which would have been his second full season. So according to your logic above (that you applied to the Tommy Bowden example), Clemson would have fired Dabo for only winning 6 games in year 2. The Bowden, Hatfield, examples that you use aren't comparable because those examples are all regarding coaches that have been there long enough to establish themselves and they didn't get it done. Muschamp is in year 2. Clemson didn't fire Dabo with a 6-7 record in year 2.

Muschamp is in year 2. The team just won 8 games. 2 more than Dabo won in his second full year (and they took a step backwards from 9 wins the year before).

Clemson right now would be doing EXACTLY the same thing Ray Tanner and SC as a whole are doing. They would be waiting to see how it panned out with a coach that was just hired two years ago.

What actually happened at Clemson is that they got very lucky, smart, whatever you want to call it in that they hired the right guy. But no AD or school ever knows for sure who the "right guy" is. You just don't. Muschamp may very well be the "right guy." Only time will tell.

 

[anon_n4c0cp5zhdxn7]

Thanks for sharing an article from Clemson Insider.

 

[viennacocks]

Vandervort | 1 hour ago

I’m often asked by those who are not from the state of South Carolina on what is the difference between Clemson’s football program and South Carolina’s.

They have asked me, why has Clemson had so much success in football over the years, and why South Carolina has not?

My answer to them is simple. Clemson people have never been satisfied.

I bring this up because of the letter written by South Carolina athletic director Ray Tanner to Gamecock fans.



Obviously, I don’t know the reason for Tanner’s letter. I’m sure he has a very good reason for it. I’m sure he is showing his support for his head football coach. I don’t understand why he felt the need to do that just two years in Will Muschamp’s tenure.

Is he just reassuring Gamecock fans he made the right hire, or is he really satisfied?

While South Carolina seems to be satisfied with going to the Outback Bowl almost every year, its rival is heading to its third straight College Football Playoff.

The Outback Bowl—South Carolina’s fifth trip to the Tamp area bowl game since 2000—and the Capital One Bowl are perhaps the two best bowl games the Carolina football program has ever been to. Maybe back in the day the Gamecocks four appearances in the old Gator Bowl and the 2010 Chick-fil-A Bowl, were considered good bowls, too. But they have never played in what is considered one of the major bowl games or what we now know as the New Year’s Six.

A South Carolina football team has never played in a Cotton Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl or Rose Bowl. Now, technically, they have played in the Peach Bowl (a.k.a Chick-fil-A Bowl), but that was before the Peach Bowl obtained elite bowl status as a New Year’s Six Bowl Game.

As for Clemson, the Tigers will be making their second trip to the Sugar Bowl on New Year’s Day where they will play No. 4 Alabama as part of the College Football Playoff Semifinals. It will mark Clemson’s 12th appearance in what is considered a major bowl game.

If you want to go ahead and give the Gamecocks credit for their two Peach Bowl/Chick-fil-A Bowl appearances, then go ahead. However, while you are doing that, go ahead and add Clemson’s eight visits to that bowl game as well.

As I wrote the Sugar Bowl will be Clemson’s second appearance in the New Orleans’ based bowl game, while it has also played in six Orange Bowls, the Fiesta Bowl, the Cotton Bowl and two College Football Playoff National Championship Games, which the NCAA recognizes a major bowl game as well.

If you are doing the math that is 12 Major Bowl game appearances for Clemson and none for South Carolina.

Granted the Gamecocks have had some good football teams over the years. Georgia Rogers won the Heisman Trophy in 1980, they had the Black Magic Year in 1984, of course Steve Spurrier’s three straight 11-win teams (2011-’13) and the one SEC East Championship (2010).

But the program has not won a conference championship since 1969, and that was back when it was in the ACC. By the way, after Saturday’s third straight ACC Championship, the Tigers have now won 23 conference titles over the years.

That is the difference between Clemson and South Carolina, and not just right now, but always. While the Gamecocks are satisfied with another 8-win season, Clemson is playing for an opportunity to win another national championship.

Granted, Clemson has not always played for a national championship, but in the years they weren’t, they were not satisfied. If you don’t believe me, then ask Tommy Bowden, Tommy West and Ken Hatfield.

Maybe you are referring to a different Ray Tanner letter? You ask for the reason for the letter? If it's the same letter I read, the letter was written to request $$. Simple as that.

 

[jeff2001]

Clemsoninsider has a message board.

 

[bushmastercock]

Vandervort | 1 hour ago

I’m often asked by those who are not from the state of South Carolina on what is the difference between Clemson’s football program and South Carolina’s.

They have asked me, why has Clemson had so much success in football over the years, and why South Carolina has not?

My answer to them is simple. Clemson people have never been satisfied.

I bring this up because of the letter written by South Carolina athletic director Ray Tanner to Gamecock fans.



Obviously, I don’t know the reason for Tanner’s letter. I’m sure he has a very good reason for it. I’m sure he is showing his support for his head football coach. I don’t understand why he felt the need to do that just two years in Will Muschamp’s tenure.

Is he just reassuring Gamecock fans he made the right hire, or is he really satisfied?

While South Carolina seems to be satisfied with going to the Outback Bowl almost every year, its rival is heading to its third straight College Football Playoff.

The Outback Bowl—South Carolina’s fifth trip to the Tamp area bowl game since 2000—and the Capital One Bowl are perhaps the two best bowl games the Carolina football program has ever been to. Maybe back in the day the Gamecocks four appearances in the old Gator Bowl and the 2010 Chick-fil-A Bowl, were considered good bowls, too. But they have never played in what is considered one of the major bowl games or what we now know as the New Year’s Six.

A South Carolina football team has never played in a Cotton Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl or Rose Bowl. Now, technically, they have played in the Peach Bowl (a.k.a Chick-fil-A Bowl), but that was before the Peach Bowl obtained elite bowl status as a New Year’s Six Bowl Game.

As for Clemson, the Tigers will be making their second trip to the Sugar Bowl on New Year’s Day where they will play No. 4 Alabama as part of the College Football Playoff Semifinals. It will mark Clemson’s 12th appearance in what is considered a major bowl game.

If you want to go ahead and give the Gamecocks credit for their two Peach Bowl/Chick-fil-A Bowl appearances, then go ahead. However, while you are doing that, go ahead and add Clemson’s eight visits to that bowl game as well.

As I wrote the Sugar Bowl will be Clemson’s second appearance in the New Orleans’ based bowl game, while it has also played in six Orange Bowls, the Fiesta Bowl, the Cotton Bowl and two College Football Playoff National Championship Games, which the NCAA recognizes a major bowl game as well.

If you are doing the math that is 12 Major Bowl game appearances for Clemson and none for South Carolina.

Granted the Gamecocks have had some good football teams over the years. Georgia Rogers won the Heisman Trophy in 1980, they had the Black Magic Year in 1984, of course Steve Spurrier’s three straight 11-win teams (2011-’13) and the one SEC East Championship (2010).

But the program has not won a conference championship since 1969, and that was back when it was in the ACC. By the way, after Saturday’s third straight ACC Championship, the Tigers have now won 23 conference titles over the years.

That is the difference between Clemson and South Carolina, and not just right now, but always. While the Gamecocks are satisfied with another 8-win season, Clemson is playing for an opportunity to win another national championship.

Granted, Clemson has not always played for a national championship, but in the years they weren’t, they were not satisfied. If you don’t believe me, then ask Tommy Bowden, Tommy West and Ken Hatfield.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts in a manner that implies that anyone here gives a s*** what thoughts go through a tater’s melon. You lost my interest at “from a tater standpoint “

 

[Cyclone94]

Look, I get what you are saying and you may be correct on some of your points, but overall I would say you are cherry picking data and your post is a little misleading.

Comparing the "satisfaction" level at SC to the "satisfaction" level at Clemson when they were getting ready to fire Tommy Bowden is apples to oranges.
In your post, you say that Clemson is never "satisfied."

Well you didn't mention how Clemson felt after year two of Dabo's tenure. This would be a much better comparison compared to what they thought regarding Tommy Bowden.

Clemson went 5 years not beating SC. Dabo went 6-7 in 2010 which would have been his second full season. So according to your logic above (that you applied to the Tommy Bowden example), Clemson would have fired Dabo for only winning 6 games in year 2. The Bowden, Hatfield, examples that you use aren't comparable because those examples are all regarding coaches that have been there long enough to establish themselves and they didn't get it done. Muschamp is in year 2. Clemson didn't fire Dabo with a 6-7 record in year 2.

Muschamp is in year 2. The team just won 8 games. 2 more than Dabo won in his second full year (and they took a step backwards from 9 wins the year before).

Clemson right now would be doing EXACTLY the same thing Ray Tanner and SC as a whole are doing. They would be waiting to see how it panned out with a coach that was just hired two years ago.

What actually happened at Clemson is that they got very lucky, smart, whatever you want to call it in that they hired the right guy. But no AD or school ever knows for sure who the "right guy" is. You just don't. Muschamp may very well be the "right guy." Only time will tell.

THIS!!!!!!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Langamecock]

My point was no gamecock fan I know, is satisfied about the overall history of the football program. Yes we have had a few good seasons but to say we are satisfied is total BS. However I do think the leaders of our football program over the years have been satisfied with mediocrity more so than any other team I know.

 

[uscdoug]

My point was no gamecock fan I know, is satisfied about the overall history of the football program. Yes we have had a few good seasons but to say we are satisfied is total BS. However I do think the leaders of our football program over the years have been satisfied with mediocrity more so than any other team I know.

Plain and simple....

You cheated then....and you cheat now!

Go away!

 

[67gamecock]

Add this difference: When something 'ain't right' with the football team, any Tater fan who can count to 4 feels perfectly at ease in calling the President of Clemson, the AD, the Prez of IPTAY, or any member of their BOT to voice their opinion about matters. Try that $&!t at Carolina and 20 minutes later you'll hear a knock on your front door and a voice bellowing, 'Open up. This is the police!'

 

[ken in sacramento]

I just checked and we still beat Clemson 5 in a row with Dabo as coach.

 

[Judson1]

No doubt in my mind those 5 years we beat Cu we would have been champions of the ACC most of them. And Orange Bowl trips would have followed.
The SEC was tough back then. And still is.
Just because you recently become competitive nationally don’t think for a second we believe your BS. This is recent success. The prior success was sporadic, a product of your conference (which has gotten better), and directly connected to cheating. Believe that!

 

[Cock_Donor]

Do me a favor and remind the stupid sack of shit who wrote that article of the technicality that kept us out of a BCS bowl. I know it's still not on par with Clem's 798 major bowl victories but it's not like we didn't kick the shit out of the taters and get screwed over on our way to a #4 finish.

 

[Langamecock]

I’m not a tater, I just posted a article that was on my computer on yahoo that I saw while at work today. I don’t agree with it as a fan but I do think our Athletic department doesn’t care as much as Clemsux athletic department about football. At least in the pass they didn’t.

 

[tigertrains]

I just checked and we still beat Clemson 5 in a row with Dabo as coach.

That’s your problem. That’s what you tout as an accomplishment. That is just a footnote in rivalry history.

You should be in the ACC coastal. Like it or not, you would have a chance in ACC. You have very little chance in SEC

 

[USC2USC]

Surely you don't think any of us care what a Moo U fan things about what our conference affiliation. Every single SC alum and fan I know is still thrilled (25 years later) thrilled we are in the SEC. Just like most Clempson fans I know would give their pinky finger to swap conferences with us.

Go away and Roll Tide!

GO COCKS!!! BEAT MICHIGAN!!!

 

[Superior7]

Thanks for sharing an article from Clemson Insider.

Exactly....Clemson see's us improving and can't stand it. Absurd that anything we do, they try to compare it to what they do.

Venables, Scott, and Elliott are interviewing for promotion so Clemson's media will be in attack mode to distract recruits vision of the possible coaching changes.

Poor Sportsmanship from classless pro-Clemson media that was mocked by Miami fans last week.

 

[TigerEnt]

Georgia fired Richt for averaging 9 wins
Fla fired coach who won the last two SEC east
Tenn fired coach who won 9 games prior two years

USC extends contract and gives a raise to a 6 win then 8 win coach. Lower standards???

 

[jeff2001]

Georgia fired Richt for averaging 9 wins
Fla fired coach who won the last two SEC east
Tenn fired coach who won 9 games prior two years

USC extends contract and gives a raise to a 6 win then 8 win coach. Lower standards???

Did Clemson lower standards when they gave the job to the WR coach in 2008 ? Yes Dabo has proven himself now but at the time it was at best a mediocre hire. You agree ?

 

[GarnetCocky1]

Why should we be "thrilled" to be in the SEC? I'd rather be in the ACC and have an objectively easier path to the CFP every year.

If we were in the ACC during our 5-peat years we would have made a few BCS appearances and won at least one of them

 

[Superior7]

Georgia fired Richt for averaging 9 wins
Fla fired coach who won the last two SEC east
Tenn fired coach who won 9 games prior two years

USC extends contract and gives a raise to a 6 win then 8 win coach. Lower standards???

Florida hired a coach that was in the league for many years and never made an SEC Championship game and averaged about 7 wins / season.




Tennessee can't find a coach to take the job and fired their AD and replaced with a man they fired in 2008.



FSU just hired a guy with a 47-50 record as a head coach to replace a National Championship winning coach that just had a 5 win season.

If Clemson had this perspective Dabo's 2nd year @ Clemson, they would have fired him. You guys are getting stupid with your perspectives and attempts to negative recruit against South Carolina....Go take some brain pills.....

 

[photontorpedotube]

OP, that was a stupid article. I lost brain cells reading it.

 

[Bongsummers]

Maybe you are referring to a different Ray Tanner letter? You ask for the reason for the letter? If it's the same letter I read, the letter was written to request $$. Simple as that.

Yep, that letter comes every year.

That said, can we please beat Clemson in something? We had a stretch where we beat them in all three men's sports with regularity. That hasn't happened since Ray became the AD.

 

[okccock]

Clemsoninsider has a message board.

most underrated post on this board ever, IMO.

 

[tigertrains]

Why should we be "thrilled" to be in the SEC? I'd rather be in the ACC and have an objectively easier path to the CFP every year.

If we were in the ACC during our 5-peat years we would have made a few BCS appearances and won at least one of them

I would not get that carried away. 2009 usc was 7-6. 2010 9-5 and lost to FSU in bowl. 2011- LSU and Bama more likely than not would have played for BCS. Perhaps you would have had an ACC title that year, but not National Championship. 2012, again another possible ACC title, however FSU was much improved. It would have been interesting ACC title game assuming USC was in Coastal division. Still think undefeated ND and Alabama play for BCS regardless. 2013- nope FSU and undefeated Jamies Winston acc and BCS Champs. So while you might have had a couple ACC banners, no National Championships

 

[gcocks2010]

That’s your problem. That’s what you tout as an accomplishment. That is just a footnote in rivalry history.

You should be in the ACC coastal. Like it or not, you would have a chance in ACC. You have very little chance in SEC

Nor would the Taters

 

[LandingSC]

Well, let us just say it this way which the Clemson homers at that site refuse to address...

Old timers know that in the middle 70s after a period of SC starting to dominate the series culminating in the Jeff Grantz lead beat down of Clemson 56-20 in which SC scored a TD every time they touched the ball on offense....Clemson' superior dis-satisfaction lead to them hiring Charlie Pell, who had on his staff a certain Danny Ford, and opening the checkbook to create what the NCAA called the worst pay-for-play operation in college football history. The NCAA wasn't aware yet of what was happening at SMU in Texas, but SMU alumni swear that their worst offense was that they were caught AFTER Clemson and not before which would have let them get Clemson's punishment and Clemson getting the death penalty. That influx of spending resulted in Clemson's first MNC in 1981, after Pell left for Florida because of the coming NCAA investigation. Ford was retained and won the MNC with those players from Pell. Clemson was put on probation the following year...Pell went on to get UF on probation as well. Ford had a successful 80s at Taterville largely on the back of that MNC. Clemson got in recruiting trouble again in 89....but wasn't put on any real punishment because of what happened in destroying the SMU program.

I do find it more than interesting that the recent successful run at Clemson followed Clemson once again starting to lose control to SC in the series with another sudden influx of highly rated talent from strange neighboring states almost exactly like the previous one in the late 70s. Cheating again? Surely not...I mean what is that old saying "Once a cheater, Never a cheater again" or is it the other way around?

Well anyway...they surely are less satisfied with losing....<rolls eyes>

 

[tigertrains]

Well, let us just say it this way which the Clemson homers at that site refuse to address...

Old timers know that in the middle 70s after a period of SC starting to dominate the series culminating in the Jeff Grantz lead beat down of Clemson 56-20 in which SC scored a TD every time they touched the ball on offense....Clemson' superior dis-satisfaction lead to them hiring Charlie Pell, who had on his staff a certain Danny Ford, and opening the checkbook to create what the NCAA called the worst pay-for-play operation in college football history. The NCAA wasn't aware yet of what was happening at SMU in Texas, but SMU alumni swear that their worst offense was that they were caught AFTER Clemson and not before which would have let them get Clemson's punishment and Clemson getting the death penalty. That influx of spending resulted in Clemson's first MNC in 1981, after Pell left for Florida because of the coming NCAA investigation. Ford was retained and won the MNC with those players from Pell. Clemson was put on probation the following year...Pell went on to get UF on probation as well. Ford had a successful 80s at Taterville largely on the back of that MNC. Clemson got in recruiting trouble again in 89....but wasn't put on any real punishment because of what happened in destroying the SMU program.

I do find it more than interesting that the recent successful run at Clemson followed Clemson once again starting to lose control to SC in the series with another sudden influx of highly rated talent from strange neighboring states almost exactly like the previous one in the late 70s. Cheating again? Surely not...I mean what is that old saying "Once a cheater, Never a cheater again" or is it the other way around?

Well anyway...they surely are less satisfied with losing....<rolls eyes>

USC was 7-5 from 1964-1975, not exactly “dominating” the series

 

[Brooster]

Vandervort | 1 hour ago

I’m often asked by those who are not from the state of South Carolina on what is the difference between Clemson’s football program and South Carolina’s.

They have asked me, why has Clemson had so much success in football over the years, and why South Carolina has not?

My answer to them is simple. Clemson people have never been satisfied.

I bring this up because of the letter written by South Carolina athletic director Ray Tanner to Gamecock fans.



Obviously, I don’t know the reason for Tanner’s letter. I’m sure he has a very good reason for it. I’m sure he is showing his support for his head football coach. I don’t understand why he felt the need to do that just two years in Will Muschamp’s tenure.

Is he just reassuring Gamecock fans he made the right hire, or is he really satisfied?

While South Carolina seems to be satisfied with going to the Outback Bowl almost every year, its rival is heading to its third straight College Football Playoff.

The Outback Bowl—South Carolina’s fifth trip to the Tamp area bowl game since 2000—and the Capital One Bowl are perhaps the two best bowl games the Carolina football program has ever been to. Maybe back in the day the Gamecocks four appearances in the old Gator Bowl and the 2010 Chick-fil-A Bowl, were considered good bowls, too. But they have never played in what is considered one of the major bowl games or what we now know as the New Year’s Six.

A South Carolina football team has never played in a Cotton Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl or Rose Bowl. Now, technically, they have played in the Peach Bowl (a.k.a Chick-fil-A Bowl), but that was before the Peach Bowl obtained elite bowl status as a New Year’s Six Bowl Game.

As for Clemson, the Tigers will be making their second trip to the Sugar Bowl on New Year’s Day where they will play No. 4 Alabama as part of the College Football Playoff Semifinals. It will mark Clemson’s 12th appearance in what is considered a major bowl game.

If you want to go ahead and give the Gamecocks credit for their two Peach Bowl/Chick-fil-A Bowl appearances, then go ahead. However, while you are doing that, go ahead and add Clemson’s eight visits to that bowl game as well.

As I wrote the Sugar Bowl will be Clemson’s second appearance in the New Orleans’ based bowl game, while it has also played in six Orange Bowls, the Fiesta Bowl, the Cotton Bowl and two College Football Playoff National Championship Games, which the NCAA recognizes a major bowl game as well.

If you are doing the math that is 12 Major Bowl game appearances for Clemson and none for South Carolina.

Granted the Gamecocks have had some good football teams over the years. Georgia Rogers won the Heisman Trophy in 1980, they had the Black Magic Year in 1984, of course Steve Spurrier’s three straight 11-win teams (2011-’13) and the one SEC East Championship (2010).

But the program has not won a conference championship since 1969, and that was back when it was in the ACC. By the way, after Saturday’s third straight ACC Championship, the Tigers have now won 23 conference titles over the years.

That is the difference between Clemson and South Carolina, and not just right now, but always. While the Gamecocks are satisfied with another 8-win season, Clemson is playing for an opportunity to win another national championship.

Granted, Clemson has not always played for a national championship, but in the years they weren’t, they were not satisfied. If you don’t believe me, then ask Tommy Bowden, Tommy West and Ken Hatfield.

If you think fans are satisfied you’re wrong. Carolina fans want it ever bit as much as Clemson fans. I can’t speak for the coaches, ADs , BOT , players, and University Presidents,(maybe thats your point, and you have a valid point there, its still early for me) but I know the without a doubt the fans want as bad as any group in the country.

 

[GarnetCocky1]

I would not get that carried away. 2009 usc was 7-6. 2010 9-5 and lost to FSU in bowl. 2011- LSU and Bama more likely than not would have played for BCS. Perhaps you would have had an ACC title that year, but not National Championship. 2012, again another possible ACC title, however FSU was much improved. It would have been interesting ACC title game assuming USC was in Coastal division. Still think undefeated ND and Alabama play for BCS regardless. 2013- nope FSU and undefeated Jamies Winston acc and BCS Champs. So while you might have had a couple ACC banners, no National Championships

Again, I said BCS appearances. That means we would have definitely had at least one Orange Bowl.

 

[trucheck]

I would rather play the best teams in the nation every year than only once or twice a year.

South Carolina has played more National Champs/number 1teams since joining the SEC that probably the entire ACC.

 

[LandingSC]

USC was 7-5 from 1964-1975, not exactly “dominating” the series

Had to go back 12 year huh?....the 56-20 beatdown was the final straw which drove the Clemson boosters over the edge as well as the results from the early 70s....just like the reaction to the 5 in a row from earlier this decade.


My grandfather owned the car dealership next to the one owned by the Clemson booster who was "employing" Homer Jordan and the other Clemson players whereby they drove new cars around campus and stopped by weekly to pick up their "paychecks".

Heard all the tales...sorry if you weren't aware of what had gone on....

This might help:
http://www.nytimes.com/1982/11/23/sports/severe-sanctions-levied-on-clemson.html

 

[LandingSC]

http://www.nytimes.com/1982/11/23/sports/severe-sanctions-levied-on-clemson.html[/QUOTE]

Here is the NY Times article....

SEVERE SANCTIONS LEVIED ON CLEMSON
AP
Published: November 23, 1982

MISSION, Kan., Nov. 22— The National Collegiate Athletic Association, citing a ''large number'' of serious recruiting violations, today placed Clemson University's football program on probation with severe sanctions. It imposed a two-year ban on television and postseason appearances on the school, and stripped the program of 20 scholarships.

An N.C.A.A. official, David Berst, said no other school had ever been penalized more than 10 scholarships. ''Coaches have been urging the Committee on Infractions to make greater use of the reduction in grants, since they believe it's a more effective penalty than the ban on television or bowl games,'' Berst, the director of the N.C.A.A. Enforcement Department, said.

He said Clemson would be limited to 20 football scholarships, rather than the normal limit of 30, during each of the next two years. Ranked No.1 Last Season

Clemson, which completed last season with a 12-0 record and was voted the final No.1 national ranking in the wire-service polls, will be banned from appearing on television during the 1983 and 1984 seasons. In addition, the N.C.A.A.'s Infractions Committee ruled that the Tigers cannot play in bowl games following this season and next season.

Clemson is 8-1-1 over all, and 5-0 in Atlantic Coast Conference competition this year, but the university president, Dr. Bill Atchley, has already said that Clemson would not participate in any bowls ths season.

Clemson officials said there would be no comment until Atchley holds a news conference Tuesday afternoon. In its announcement of the probation tonight at its headquarters here, the N.C.A.A. cited violations dating from 1977 to 1982. Dan Ford, the present Clemson head coach, replaced Charlie Pell in December 1978 after Pell resigned to become coach at Florida. The violations included giving prospective players automobiles, television sets, clothing, ''substantial'' sums of cash and other gifts, the N.C.A.A. said. In addition, the N.C.A.A. said Clemson had awarded scholarships to friends and relatives of recruits and paid telephone bills of recruits' families.

 

[LandingSC]

It does strike me that most schools would have wanted to clean house after such a debacle but not Clemson...they let the Head Coach leave to go to UF but kept the entire offending staff around for business as usual.

 

[tigertrains]

Had to go back 12 year huh?....the 56-20 beatdown was the final straw which drove the Clemson boosters over the edge as well as the results from the early 70s....just like the reaction to the 5 in a row from earlier this decade.


My grandfather owned the car dealership next to the one owned by the Clemson booster who was "employing" Homer Jordan and the other Clemson players whereby they drove new cars around campus and stopped by weekly to pick up their "paychecks".

Heard all the tales...sorry if you weren't aware of what had gone on....

This might help:
http://www.nytimes.com/1982/11/23/sports/severe-sanctions-levied-on-clemson.html

 

[tigertrains]

How far back did you want. I gave you two more victories going 12 years. 10 years would be 5-5.15 years 8-7. Go further back worse for your argument

 

[cockytalk89]

Why should we be "thrilled" to be in the SEC? I'd rather be in the ACC and have an objectively easier path to the CFP every year.

If we were in the ACC during our 5-peat years we would have made a few BCS appearances and won at least one of them

To your second point, you're probably correct. Clemson made it to a BCS game twice during the infamous, but now distant 5 year stretch.

However, I disagree that the ACC path is easier as of lately. The SEC keeps getting the benefit of the doubt in the rankings clearly, but the quality of teams has dropped off significantly. Nobody in the east not named UGA would be what I'd consider a "quality" team including us (let's be honest, we got propped up by an unusually easy schedule). The west wasn't much better. It was really Bama and Auburn and then a whole lot of mediocrity, then Arky. Maybe its just me, but it seems like aside from the CFP teams the margin of difference between teams over .500 isn't much.

 

[LandingSC]

You are just distracting from the point of the post...and obviously don't even know what occurred at your school. Clemson old timers have long acknowledged that they were not going to put up with the 56-20 losses to SC as the reason why the renewed push in 75-81. It worked and got you a MNC and decade of "success".

I am sure that it must have come as quite a shock most likely being a devout follower of the fanboys at WCCP and the rest of the upstate media....where Clemson is God's college football team and they are the very definition of righteousness and goodness in the world.

Look just as obvious is the parallels between the two eras....Clemson is suddenly losing to SC, suddenly gets a large influx of players from across the nation for some reason when all logic would point to them having MORE difficulty recruiting not easier chances in beating the likes of FSU, UF, Alabama, UGA, Auburn, LSU, Texas for those schools instate talent....has Clemson been cheating AGAIN?

Well, you know the saying "...it wouldn't be the first time".

And the original post was about Clemson fans and their more aggressive dissatisfaction levels...just pointing out that it has lead to some seriously unsavory behavior from those fans in the past. Look up Roger McIntosh and Jeff Littlejohn...that was just a few years ago and involved Gaffney players getting "paid" for landscaping work at the Clemson headcoach's house and car loan help for one of the player's mother. In case some don't know Gaffney is 70 miles from Clemson but then who doesn't transport kids that far away to do yard work? What there aren't any kids in Pickens County to ride on a lawnmower? Ole Miss\Clemson were neck\neck for Treadway and Nkemdiche which are the recruits which lead to the Ole Miss debacle.

 

[tigertrains]

You are just distracting from the point of the post...and obviously don't even know what occurred at your school. Clemson old timers have long acknowledged that they were not going to put up with the 56-20 losses to SC as the reason why the renewed push in 75-81. It worked and got you a MNC and decade of "success".

I am sure that it must have come as quite a shock most likely being a devout follower of the fanboys at WCCP and the rest of the upstate media....where Clemson is God's college football team and they are the very definition of righteousness and goodness in the world.

Look just as obvious is the parallels between the two eras....Clemson is suddenly losing to SC, suddenly gets a large influx of players from across the nation for some reason when all logic would point to them having MORE difficulty recruiting not easier chances in beating the likes of FSU, UF, Alabama, UGA, Auburn, LSU, Texas for those schools instate talent....has Clemson been cheating AGAIN?

Well, you know the saying "...it wouldn't be the first time".

And the original post was about Clemson fans and their more aggressive dissatisfaction levels...just pointing out that it has lead to some seriously unsavory behavior from those fans in the past. Look up Roger McIntosh and Jeff Littlejohn...that was just a few years ago and involved Gaffney players getting "paid" for landscaping work at the Clemson headcoach's house and car loan help for one of the player's mother. In case some don't know Gaffney is 70 miles from Clemson but then who doesn't transport kids that far away to do yard work? What there aren't any kids in Pickens County to ride on a lawnmower? Ole Miss\Clemson were neck\neck for Treadway and Nkemdiche which are the recruits which lead to the Ole Miss debacle.

You guys discounted the 81 championship as an aberration. Clemson only won because they cheated. If it was easy to cheat and win, Ole Miss would have a Championship. You conviently leave out all the other National Champion teams who also cheated. If you ain’t cheating, you ain’t trying, an SEC cheer. Now that you can’t legitimately negate back to back championship appearances and a third final four, you are reduced to unfounded accusations of the current staff when your own school most recently faced the NCAA

 

[raycock2001]

Georgia fired Richt for averaging 9 wins
Fla fired coach who won the last two SEC east
Tenn fired coach who won 9 games prior two years

USC extends contract and gives a raise to a 6 win then 8 win coach. Lower standards???

Lower standards? How? This 8 win team was expected to win 4! Read that again tater, 4! We won 8. That is double of what was expected. That is why a contract extention is warranted. Go on back up to tater town.