Unacceptable
- Thread starter johnnohj
- Start date
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
Are we really that shocked to be on this list? As a program, we are not much over .500 all-time.
Belk Bowl is a blip on the data that leads to this ranking...
no where to go but up ?
what's unacceptable about it? it's our history.
We've had 14 genuine head coaches. Our overall record is not a fluke.
We've had 14 genuine head coaches. Our overall record is not a fluke.
Unacceptable? Nah. It is what it was. I for one refuse to cry over spilled milk.
Go Gamecocks.
Go Gamecocks.
So that chart is for what, the past 100 or more years? Where are we now or over the past ten years or so? A lot closer to the top 25 than the top 50. Recruits don't care what happened 30, 50, or 70 years ago, and I doubt many fans do either.
Recruits also don't care what happened 7 seasons ago. Guys we're recruiting now were 11-12 years old the last time we had a genuinely good season.
Except the milk has been spilt over our entire history as a program. It is unacceptable.
This just reaffirms why I don't watch ESPN for their commentary and couldn't care less about twitter.
?????
Is this supposed to be sarcasm ?
They came in one spot better than us, not that's saying much, but that doesn't leave much room to stand on to diss NCSTU.
Anybody can have a bad century.
Signed, UofSC football
Lol.. this ain’t ESPN or Twitter’s fault. The results would be the same if they had been carved in a rock.
My point is I have no interest in viewing or listening to some commentator's opinion of who the worst programs in history are. And it's crap like the list itself that tunes me right out.
True, but I suppose there's a tendency to assume there as many programs above .500 as below, so we would end up somewhere in the middle. But it's obvious that the now-P5 programs were much better at beating up on the nobodies than we were back in the day.
Looking back, we were probably very fortunate that our fan support was so great back in the 70s and 80s, despite fielding some pretty bad teams, so as to make us an attractive addition to a P5 conference like the SEC.
Pretty sobering that Duke and Vandy ain't on that list.
Then move on... I hate to see you suffer.
I think the writing is on the wall because this staff failed to see how important the Va game was. The most glaring mistake-not using all the allotted bowl game practices(We will not be outworked). What kind of signal does that send to the team and fans? One player who did not care enuff to play was allowed to stand on the sideline and be a distraction. He should have been watching at home on tv. Stupid decisions by a smart coach is troubling.
Be careful...truth doesn't fare well here.
If this actually factors the entire history, I question the veracity of it. I look at, and compare random teams quite often on Winsipedia, and some people might be surprised at which teams are below .500, but not on this list, for example.....Miss. State, and a team that had maybe 1 winning season in the 25-30 years before George Welsh arrived, Virginia, but could still hit 700 wins before State hits 600. That’s actually an impressive win total considering the best football team of all time wasn’t even near 700 as recently as the first few years of the Dabo era, when they still wanted to fire him. Conversely, Nebraska, ND, Michigan, Bammer, Texas, OU are in the 900 club (or real close), and some of those blue bloods have been a shell of themselves for years.
We have a lot of strikes against us, and mostly self-inflicted, but I’d bet this da list is not one of them. If anything, our last 10-20 years would exclude us from this list. And, funny about Duke, and Vandy, but both are under .500 all time. Shocking.
We have a lot of strikes against us, and mostly self-inflicted, but I’d bet this da list is not one of them. If anything, our last 10-20 years would exclude us from this list. And, funny about Duke, and Vandy, but both are under .500 all time. Shocking.
Given the original tweet, this isn't based on record; it's based on Connelly's S&P+, a college football ratings system derived from the play-by-play and drive data of a season's FBS college football games. The S&P+ takes into account opponent-adjusted components of efficiency, explosiveness, and factors related to field position and finishing drives. I don't know about you, but I am even more outraged than before at our mediocrity!
Newberry has been Division II for as long as I can remember. Unless there is a different Newberry in Division I, I have never heard of it. It should not be on the list.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
@GeoCocky "I don't know about you, but I am even more outraged than before at our mediocrity!"
Yes, am getting tired of it especially since Clemson has proven that it can be done and in a supposedly BB conference. Even more sad is that Clemson was out recruiting and taking the necessary steps during USC's five game winning streak. Even the present state of USC FB could be called mediocre. Why should admin worry about whether or not USC has a GREAT FB team when fans show up for the games regardless and are the greatest excuse makers on planet earth? Things may be changing, tho. Don't think WB would be a sellout if 0-11. I hope so. Sparsely attended games may be the only way to get them to FOCUS and take the necessary steps to succeed.
Fans are taken for granted and the sorry outing in the Belk Bowl last season was an indicator.
Yes, am getting tired of it especially since Clemson has proven that it can be done and in a supposedly BB conference. Even more sad is that Clemson was out recruiting and taking the necessary steps during USC's five game winning streak. Even the present state of USC FB could be called mediocre. Why should admin worry about whether or not USC has a GREAT FB team when fans show up for the games regardless and are the greatest excuse makers on planet earth? Things may be changing, tho. Don't think WB would be a sellout if 0-11. I hope so. Sparsely attended games may be the only way to get them to FOCUS and take the necessary steps to succeed.
Fans are taken for granted and the sorry outing in the Belk Bowl last season was an indicator.
What would you do to take the "necessary" steps? Off Dabo....because I don't think he is going to get lazy and rest on his laurels like Spurrier did.
"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I can't change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."
We have to come to grips with reality that things are never going to change. College football has been around a long time. If you go back and look at rankings from previous decades, what you generally see is mostly the usual suspects in the top 10. There's some fluctuation and some outsiders may break in for a season or two and some teams may fall off for a few years. You have blips here and there, like us in 201-2013 and Northwestern back in the 90s, when previously moribund programs experience unprecedented success, but it's not lasting.
There is simply no blueprint for taking team with solid 100+ years of mediocrity and turning it into a consistent top 25 team. It's never been done and it likely won't happen here.
It's the thrill of the chase that keep us engaged though.
There is simply no blueprint for taking team with solid 100+ years of mediocrity and turning it into a consistent top 25 team. It's never been done and it likely won't happen here.
It's the thrill of the chase that keep us engaged though.
Latest posts
-
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: Reacting To The Gamecocks' Spring Game- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
Gamecock Scoop Podcast: Reacting To The Gamecocks' Spring Game
- Latest: Caleb Alexander
-
-