"they were not that much better than us"
- Thread starter LazyIslander
- Start date
- Status
You are too funny. Up to par with clemson? The current national champ who whipped us in an epic beat down? A 6-7 team?
You are the best Manafold, delusion of the highest order.
Last edited:
I agree with everything you say, but this thread is about Jake's specific statement.
The problem with most gamecock fans is that we see what we are recruiting and rarely look at what our opponents are bringing in. If we have a good or great recruiting class, then we feel like we will be unstoppable. But we don't realize or have blinders on to what Jawga, UT, Florida, or that upstate team are bringing in. For instance, if we just lost Shaw and we had the #1 QB in the nation coming in(Hunter Johnson), a 4 star redshirt in Zerrick Cooper, 4 star Kelly Bryant, 4 star Chase Brice, next year's #1 QB Trevor Lawrence, we would feel pretty good about our QB situation. They will not be down long at that position, they just need time to mature. I wish we had their problems at QB.
On this board, it is customary to be negative and expect nothing. A bunch of grumpy old men.........
I'll say this much for Jake- He has created a football thread that has reached Page 4. Bravo. No words for how sick of baseball whining I was getting. Whether Clemson or South Carolina wins or loses at boringball is of no import to me. Might as well read up on whippet racing.
Playing Queen's "We Are the Champions" all over that video is so very appropriate, considering the perverse pleasure exhibited by Boulware and Wilkins in grabbing players' genitals and digging up their butts. As a matter of fact, Watson does prance around like Freddie Mercury after first downs, touchdowns, interceptions, fumbles, lol! That should be required watching for every Gamecock football player daily, whether lifting or practicing, for the next six months.
did anyone see Boulware and most of the defense at the Championship party after the parade??
First off, Clemson's "stars" have been developed better and are higher ranked than ours. Bentley is great and all but who did he beat last year? Tennessee? UMASS? Mizzou? UT is a solid win but he (and the rest of the team) has a lot of developing to do. All 4, that's right 4, of Clemson's QBs will come into our game being higher rated recruits than Bentley. Our recruiting has improved, their recruiting has improved even more; they are being mentioned with Bama and Ohio St in recruiting articles.
Second, hard to argue against Clemson's best, but that was historically one of our average teams and far from the worst, lets not remember the 0-12 team. 6-7 is historically where our team resides.
In summary, yeah last year it was light years; I would have traded our starter for their starter at all 22 starting OFF and DEF positions. Next year is a new year though, maybe graduation and attrition on their team and maturation on ours will shrink the gap enough to make the game at least competitive.... It wasn't last year.
Anytime you see someone characterizing their opponents as gay, you know they've already won. This has to be the worst retort in all of sports. It sounds juvenile. It shows that you don't have the intellect to come up with anything better. It highlights that you're at least a little bigoted. And it insults people who are actually gay.
This is why Jake should have kept his head down and his mouth shut. Just win.
And then some of us are intelligent enough to realize that being gay is not genetic, but is one of the possible results of thinking you have no use for God, or worse, you decide that you will be your own god, as Romans 1 clearly explains.
Being gay and believing in God are mutually exclusive? LOL.
You have to ask those that live in Pickens
I'm not sure you actually know what "intelligent" means, b/c your argument certainly doesn't show it. You made a "faith based" argument. That is an argument based on what you fully believe to be true in the absence of scientific proof. I'm not prepared to argue your point from that perspective as I don't pretend to know the mind of God. But remember, that same book you are quoting also says that you can't go 6 miles from home on Sunday, You can't work on Sunday, you can't eat pork or shrimp, slaves should obey their masters, and that women should live outside the home during "that time of the month". How many of those have you violated?
On the other hand an "intelligent" argument is based on observation and scientific evidence. Longitudinal studies on this matter actually point toward the opposite of what you saying. So much so in fact that the American Medical Association has condemned "conversion therapy" as ineffective. The conclusion is that gay people are born that way, not made. Scientists estimate that about 6% of the population is homosexual. Interestingly enough, this is repeated in the animal kingdom as well.
Read much? Believing in and having no use for are two entirely different things.
Some really interesting points made here and a lot of them have merit. I do believe that the 2017 season should show a narrowing of the gap between Clemson/USC. However, I do believe that gap will still be there and I would be very surprised if Clemson lost at WB. I look at things like this.
Clemson lost the best QB to ever wear the uniform. To think that there won’t be a step back in that regard is silly.
IMHO, QB’s represent the “upside” or “ceiling” of a team. We saw that numerous times with Watson. When you need a drive to win the game, there was no one better at it than Watson. However, when that QB is off, the upside of the team is significantly lowered. See the Pitt/NC State/Troy games. On paper, none of these teams should have played Clemson even close. But each of these games were defined by multiple missteps at the QB spot. Clemson will have a lower ceiling this year than last unless some sort of miracle occurs at the QB spot.
A defense represents the “floor” of a team. You hear terms like “defense travels”. This means that a team with a really good defense will only play so badly and that team will generally be “in” games. Take UF for example recently. Really bad offense, elite level defense. Their losses and wins are full of close games where the defense kept the game close and a bit of offense (or lack thereof) won or lost the game. IMHO, Clemson’s defense should be substantially better across the board than they were in 2016.
What I think this means for Clemson is that this team won’t have the upside to defeat “elite” teams, but will actually have an easier time beating the teams that Clemson is superior to. I’m thinking 9-10 wins this year with a loss to FSU and one or two to … you pick ‘em (Auburn, Louisville, VT, NCState).
Clemson lost the best QB to ever wear the uniform. To think that there won’t be a step back in that regard is silly.
IMHO, QB’s represent the “upside” or “ceiling” of a team. We saw that numerous times with Watson. When you need a drive to win the game, there was no one better at it than Watson. However, when that QB is off, the upside of the team is significantly lowered. See the Pitt/NC State/Troy games. On paper, none of these teams should have played Clemson even close. But each of these games were defined by multiple missteps at the QB spot. Clemson will have a lower ceiling this year than last unless some sort of miracle occurs at the QB spot.
A defense represents the “floor” of a team. You hear terms like “defense travels”. This means that a team with a really good defense will only play so badly and that team will generally be “in” games. Take UF for example recently. Really bad offense, elite level defense. Their losses and wins are full of close games where the defense kept the game close and a bit of offense (or lack thereof) won or lost the game. IMHO, Clemson’s defense should be substantially better across the board than they were in 2016.
What I think this means for Clemson is that this team won’t have the upside to defeat “elite” teams, but will actually have an easier time beating the teams that Clemson is superior to. I’m thinking 9-10 wins this year with a loss to FSU and one or two to … you pick ‘em (Auburn, Louisville, VT, NCState).
What conclusion? Show me the "gay gene"! Let's face it, Hollywood has embraced the "being gay is so cool and normal" mantra, so we both know millions have been spent in research trying to find that hereditary link. That's never going to happen even with real science. Let's talk about observation .... why aren't all identical twins both gay or straight if people are born that way? I've never met a gay person who will even admit that the Bible calls homosexuality a sin, in both the New and Old Testaments. As a matter of fact, most of the gays I know attend churches that don't believe in guilt, sin, hell or repentance. Isn't that interesting?
If being gay is a choice then that means YOU could just decide to be gay and do it. Right?
I'm pretty sure for most people it is not. Because I could not choose to be attracted to other men, no matter how hard I tried. It just would't work. I'm not wired that way. I'm sexually attracted to women and I can't choose otherwise. That has nothing to do with religion or my beliefs about (or usefulness for) God.
So when a gay person tells me they were born that way, and they did not choose it, why would I assume they are lying?
But that has noting to do with the juvenile tendency to call an opposing teams' players gay.
I'm pretty sure for most people it is not. Because I could not choose to be attracted to other men, no matter how hard I tried. It just would't work. I'm not wired that way. I'm sexually attracted to women and I can't choose otherwise. That has nothing to do with religion or my beliefs about (or usefulness for) God.
So when a gay person tells me they were born that way, and they did not choose it, why would I assume they are lying?
But that has noting to do with the juvenile tendency to call an opposing teams' players gay.
Of course I can’t show you a gay gene, b/c there’s never been one identified. But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t biological cursors for being gay. After all. Show me God. You can’t… even though we both know that millions have been spent trying to prove the existence of God.
Let’s talk about observation. I see horrible things happen to innocent people every day. How could a good and just God allow such things to happen? And if being gay is purely a choice, why are animals gay at the same rate as people? Didn’t God make them to serve us? They don’t have a choice or a soul. Why would THEY be gay.
And if being gay were actually a choice, why would the conversion therapies that religions have been using for centuries have such poor results? Why would anyone WANT to be a pariah and get the shiit beat out of them (and that’s here in the US). Lots of places in the world just execute gays out of hand. Why would you CHOOSE that instead of a normal life?
I'm aware of where this thread started, but I was mostly commenting about the post indicating Clemson is "light years ahead of us" not necessarily about last year but now as well (or, that's I I read it)! That's where I was coming from because these comments often get a little off-topic and start a whole new life LOL! They definitely were ahead last year - no question - but when Jake was asked that question he spoke how he felt & has a right to feel - believes in himself & his teammates and building confidence (no different - btw - than when Clemson's players & coaches never admitted we were so much better when we were dominating recently! That seems to be forgotten in all this discussion!
What's interesting is you picking and choosing what sins to enforce and what sins to ignore based on what your pastor tells you. Such a sheep. Either they're all sins, or they aren't, but you've decided that you get to pick and choose. Homophobia in 2017 is adorable. You deserve a gay son, but he certainly wouldn't deserve you.
I mean...not really. It's almost entirely pointless to attempt to debate somebody whose abstract, unprovable concept trumps all logic and reason.
I never wrote that people chose to be gay .... it's a possible result of other choices about their relationship with God. Again, a careful study of Romans 1 explains it best. But, for the sake of argument, let's say all gay people were born gay. You do know that prisons are full of gay people, right? This is not a myth, as I have known prison guards and officials at several prisons throughout the southeast. So do you suggest we go ahead and lock up all known gays to prevent them from committing crimes? If I'm a bank robber or a contract killer, wouldn't it ease my conscience to explain that I can't help it .... I was just born that way? As for the "juvenile tendency to call an opposing teams' players gay", what would YOUR definition be for the game actions of Boulware and Wilkins?
Who said anything about picking and choosing what sins to enforce and what sins to ignore? I sure didn't. If you have a problem with God, I suggest you deal with that personally. As for being homophobic, why should I fear gay people (unless I'm an offensive football player on the same field as Clemson's defense)? As for the sheep reference, that would be those who swallow the bait that the GBLT coalition feeds them.
I think you have to take their word on it... they did it to mess with opposing players and get in their head. And it appears that it worked.
At the end of the day, I will be 66 in March. Given a life expectancy of say to the age of 90, I hope to see us win a game or two before I leave leave this world. My opinion at this point, I do not believe the current staff/management at USC has the guts to pull off what Clemson did, and I think we all know what that was. Russian roulette for sure, but it worked for them.
- Status
