ADVERTISEMENT

So the ACC went 0-6 in bowls/playoffs?

Gradstudent

Gradstudent

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2006
5,715
6,857
113
  • Like
Reactions: THMoore100, Crazy Cock 89, rogue cock and 3 others
I was thinking about this last night. If ND stays in the ACC. The ACC could get 2 teams in several times especially if it expanse to 8 teams. ND 12-0 and clemson 11-1 or vice versa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gradstudent
jeff2001 said:
I was thinking about this last night. If ND stays in the ACC. The ACC could get 2 teams in several times especially if it expanse to 8 teams. ND 12-0 and clemson 11-1 or vice versa.
Click to expand...
One thing we learned this year was ND will join a conference if they feel the need to. A new playoff system should force it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeBoer31 and Crazy Cock 89
Cockish said:
Only clempson makes the acc relevant. And they have choked the last 3 consecutive years in the CFPs against stronger conference teams.
Click to expand...

Agree with the first part, but 3 consecutive years? Clemson won one tiltle, then one semi, then lost this year. Is that choking all 3 years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerWhite
As badly as the ACC showed out how well did the SEC come off?

I did a little more research. I haven't checked the other conferences. But, with the exceptions of Bama and aTm, every other SEC team played a more highly rated team. Even the teams who lost (Fla and AU) were playing as underdogs.

SEC - (AP Top 25)
Bama (1) vs ND (4)
aTm (5) vs UNC (14)
MSU vs Tulsa (22)
Georgia (11) vs Cinci (6)
Ole Miss vs IU (7)
UK vs NC State (23)
--------------------------------
AU vs NW (15)
Fla (10) vs OU (8)

How sick is that?
 
USMCatFan said:
As badly as the ACC showed out how well did the SEC come off?

I did a little more research. I haven't checked the other conferences. But, with the exceptions of Bama and aTm, every other SEC team played a more highly rated team. Even the teams who lost (Fla and AU) were playing as underdogs.

SEC - (AP Top 25)
Bama (1) vs ND (4)
aTm (5) vs UNC (14)
MSU vs Tulsa (22)
Georgia (11) vs Cinci (6)
Ole Miss vs IU (7)
UK vs NC State (23)
--------------------------------
AU vs NW (15)
Fla (10) vs OU (8)

How sick is that?
Click to expand...

Yeah for years the 5th, 6th, or 7th SEC team would usually play the 2nd or 3rd best team from another conference in bowl games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cockofdawn and USMCatFan
USMCatFan said:
As badly as the ACC showed out how well did the SEC come off?

I did a little more research. I haven't checked the other conferences. But, with the exceptions of Bama and aTm, every other SEC team played a more highly rated team. Even the teams who lost (Fla and AU) were playing as underdogs.

SEC - (AP Top 25)
Bama (1) vs ND (4)
aTm (5) vs UNC (14)
MSU vs Tulsa (22)
Georgia (11) vs Cinci (6)
Ole Miss vs IU (7)
UK vs NC State (23)
--------------------------------
AU vs NW (15)
Fla (10) vs OU (8)

How sick is that?
Click to expand...
In the ACC, 5 ranked teams played and one unranked. An unranked WF lost to Wisc. Three of the 5 ranked played lower ranked teams. The exception being UNC and ND. ND naturally had to play a higher ranked being a 4 seed in the playoff.
 
TAV31 said:
Yeah for years the 5th, 6th, or 7th SEC team would usually play the 2nd or 3rd best team from another conference in bowl games.
Click to expand...

I knew that going in as underdogs was nothing new. But, the SEC, who routinely places 10 - 12 teams into bowls usually only goes about .500 or slightly better.

When the 10 game conference schedules came out I told friends that it was likely that the SEC was building a group of gladiators for the bowl season. After a conference only season that there would likely be a bunch of pissed off SEC teams going into the post season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 67Rocks
At this point, it's hard to deny that the ACC was grossly overrated this year. Basically 1 or 2 pretty good teams and a bunch of garbage below. And Clemson got clowned for the 2nd year in a row. The playoff committee needs to think long and hard before putting teams from that conference into the playoffs in the future if they want people to tune in to these games. Those games sucked if you didn't have a rooting interest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gradstudent
Lurker123 said:
Agree with the first part, but 3 consecutive years? Clemson won one tiltle, then one semi, then lost this year. Is that choking all 3 years?
Click to expand...
Ok, 2 out of 3...my point being clempson cruises through an all cupcake conference to make the CFPs, then underperforms (chokes) against an opponent from a superior conference.
 
Cockish said:
So underperforming (i.e., choking) against a superior conference team, when clempson cruises to the CFP via a cup cake conference, is ridiculous? Please explain yourself.
Click to expand...
They have been to the playoff I think 6 times. 4 in the title game and 2 title. That's not choking. That's the same thing the baseball team did under Tanner. Good lord.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe MorrisonLives
Cockish said:
Ok, 2 out of 3...my point being clempson cruises through an all cupcake conference to make the CFPs, then underperforms (chokes) against an opponent from a superior conference.
Click to expand...

If you count this year as choking against an opponent from a superior conference, one would think they would have to get credit for last year, beating that same team from that same conference.

And yes, winning the national title should not be considered choking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeZip and jeff2001
Minor Bowls are now irrelevant now that players can opt out to prepare for the pro combine. Only the Bowls that have a path to a National championship will be relevant. I foresee the end of Bowls anyway. The UF/OU game ended my desire to watch non-National championship Bowls.
 
hahnenkampf said:
Minor Bowls are now irrelevant now that players can opt out to prepare for the pro combine. Only the Bowls that have a path to a National championship will be relevant. I foresee the end of Bowls anyway. The UF/OU game ended my desire to watch non-National championship Bowls.
Click to expand...

I don't think things for the bowl season are as dire as that. This year was a One-Off with the COVID protocols, schedules, etc. The players are just exhausted physically and emotionally. That played into so many kids opting out.

The bowls were considered as being no more than "Away Games" this year. There was no extra travel, excursions or bowl activities. Just the games. It was no shock to have a large number of guys opt out this year.

Stoops had a meeting with the team the day after the game with you guys. He told them that it was up to them and the staff would support whatever they decided. He said he was shocked at how close it was to being unanimous to go to a bowl. UK was also fortunate in that Joseph (transfer from LSU) has been the only kid to ever opt out. But, he was never reputed to be a team first guy anyway.
 
Gradstudent said:
Or did I mis calculate?

Why again did they get 2 teams in the playoff?

Cheez-It Bowl
No. 21 Oklahoma State 37, No. 18 Miami 34

Duke's Mayo Bowl
Wisconsin 42, Wake Forest 28

TaxSlayer Gator Bowl
Kentucky 23, No. 23 NC State 21

Capital One Orange Bowl
No. 5 Texas A&M 41, No. 13 North Carolina 27

Rose Bowl (College Football Playoff semifinal)
No. 1 Alabama 31, No. 4 Notre Dame 14

Sugar Bowl (College Football Playoff semifinal)
No. 3 Ohio State 49, No. 2 Clemson 28
Click to expand...


The demise of FSU and the ACC overall (VATech, Miami, etc) has had a lot to do with Clempson's success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gradstudent and cockofdawn
Everyone knows the ACC is weak. It really hasn't mattered, though, as Clemson had been able, over the past few years, to go toe-to-toe with the elite teams from the SEC and ACC. That changed last year against LSU...but they were a historically good team. They definitely got throat-chopped by OSU. I honestly think Clemson fell victim to buying their own hype, which is pretty uncharacteristic of a Dabo-coached team. I really don't think they believed OSU could hang with them. It showed in their body language. Not saying I think Clemson would have won had they been more focused, but they certainly were expecting to win and were not expecting a tough game.
 
Cockish said:
Only clempson makes the acc relevant. And they have choked the last 3 consecutive years in the CFPs against stronger conference teams.
Click to expand...
You mean like in 2018 (one of those consecutive years) where they won the national title by blowing out Bama? Sure, I hate them. But no need to exaggerate their failures.
 
DibbleDee said:
Everyone knows the ACC is weak. It really hasn't mattered, though, as Clemson had been able, over the past few years, to go toe-to-toe with the elite teams from the SEC and ACC. That changed last year against LSU...but they were a historically good team. They definitely got throat-chopped by OSU. I honestly think Clemson fell victim to buying their own hype, which is pretty uncharacteristic of a Dabo-coached team. I really don't think they believed OSU could hang with them. It showed in their body language. Not saying I think Clemson would have won had they been more focused, but they certainly were expecting to win and were not expecting a tough game.
Click to expand...
It matters if your like me and want to see every single team in their conference lose. If that results in a permanent pedestal for the taters, so be it. To be honest I dont care. What I do care about is the consistent prop up of the conference every single year by the pollsters because they wish it so. Every year they are wrong and every year theyre proven wrong is a good year.
 
Not only did the ACC lose all six of their bowl games...five of the losses were by double digits. Sheesh...
 
bucketdad said:
It matters if your like me and want to see every single team in their conference lose. If that results in a permanent pedestal for the taters, so be it. To be honest I dont care. What I do care about is the consistent prop up of the conference every single year by the pollsters because they wish it so. Every year they are wrong and every year theyre proven wrong is a good year.
Click to expand...

Well, sure, that's one aspect. My post was targeted to those are trying to extrapolate from the ACCs bowl record that Clemson is no good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bucketdad
DibbleDee said:
Well, sure, that's one aspect. My post was targeted to those are trying to extrapolate from the ACCs bowl record that Clemson is no good.
Click to expand...
I'd agree that trying to prove clemson is bad by association is not a winning arguement to make. That said, whatever the reason for bring up the ACC's record is a good one imo. Sickens me to see them take up space in the top 25 while a conference like the AAC has to spend the season clawing their way in... and in many cases, not breaking in until after several ACC teams fall out of their given spots. Difference this year is with no ooc to speak of, the ACC occupied that space far longer than they deserved, basically shutting out more deserving teams. That should piss off everyone outside that pathetic conference. The good thing is 0-6 is at least some justification.

Pardon the rant. Felt good tho.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DibbleDee
bucketdad said:
I'd agree that trying to prove clemson is bad by association is not a winning arguement to make. That said, whatever the reason for bring up the ACC's record is a good one imo. Sickens me to see them take up space in the top 25 while a conference like the AAC has to spend the season clawing their way in... and in many cases, not breaking in until after several ACC teams fall out of their given spots. Difference this year is with no ooc to speak of, the ACC occupied that space far longer than they deserved, basically shutting out more deserving teams. That should piss off everyone outside that pathetic conference. The good thing is 0-6 is at least some justification.

Pardon the rant. Felt good tho.
Click to expand...

I suspect you'll probably see some of this reflected in the polls next year. It says something that ND, as an independent, came into the conference for one season, dominated and then got shelled in the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bucketdad
jeff2001 said:
They have been to the playoff I think 6 times. 4 in the title game and 2 title. That's not choking. That's the same thing the baseball team did under Tanner. Good lord.
Click to expand...
It must be a slow day if you're having to look that hard for someone to defend.
 
USC2USC said:
No, i don't think so. If that was the case, for example with FSU, they would have still been having good years recently with just one loss to Clemson. That's not the case.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I was referring to the finite number of elite recruits. Clemson recruits well in Florida these days and generally gets players that would choose Fla. St. once upon a time. I believe this is why Clemson and Alabama have have outpaced most other schools so badly, and maybe the reason Texas is having such difficulty becoming a powerhouse.
 
I'll always pull against the ACC as I remember the way we were treated by tobacco road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bleadgandb3334

More liars in the Clemson media need to be called out! Writer for the Greensville News flat out lies about UNC players being out for todays game!

Replies
29
Views
3K
Gamecocks Forum
01fatboy
01fatboy
gamecockgop06

Updated Bowl Projections

Replies
16
Views
2K
The Insiders Forum
haneynfl
haneynfl
C

Availability/schedule this week through bowl game

Replies
0
Views
308
The Insiders Forum
Collyn Taylor
C
gamecockgop06

Various Bowl Projections

Replies
7
Views
1K
The Insiders Forum
spurrierfan9
spurrierfan9
GandBinNC

USC football in the ACC

Replies
44
Views
2K
The Insiders Forum
Mcreekcock
M
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back