What If We Switched Schedules?

[SportsSuites1]

There's no denying clemson holds a 60/40 lifetime lead on South Carolina head-to-head but it's been so much better since Steve Spurrier took over ... and that's playing against FAR SUPERIOR competition.

What would happen if we 'switched' schedules with clemson? Well, let's see what HAS happened.

LIFETIME against the SEC clemson is 45- 96-5 for a success rate of .3191%
LIFETIME against the SEC So Caro is 95-166-8 for a success rate of .3639%

BUT, in the last 10-years since Spurrier's arrival the Gamecocks are 44-37 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .5432% (and that COUNTS last night)

While, in the last 10 years clemson is 9-11 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .4500%

Head-to-head in the last 10-years SC is 6-4 vs. clemson for a success rate of 60%
Head-to-head vs. SC in the last 10-years clemson is 4-6 for a success rate of 40%

It's evident that if clemson had been playing SC's schedule the last 23-years they would have fared FAR LESS SUCCESSFUL than the 'record' they consistently brag about.

And it's VERY CLEAR that since Spurrier arrived USC has done FAR BETTER against both 'common opponents' and vs. clemson head-to-head.

clemson was a 'terror' years ago in the ACC and they certainly terrorized us, too - especially from the 70's - 90's but it's CRYSTAL they don't 'terrorize' us any more and they NEVER TERRORIZED the SEC, where we have to play great teams almost EVERY WEEK.

clemson said 'give me the facts' ... well, the FACTS ARE that LIFETIME against the toughest competition in America we beat you by nearly FIVE PERCENTAGE POINTS, and as ANY head-to-head politician will attest, THAT is a STOMP "head-to-head".

 

[jeff2001]

Stop

 

[jonesz21]

I think we need to worry about this yr. And we sure don't need to make fun of clemson they get that it all revolves around recruiting

 

[sgacock]

Well, this year, if we had their schedule, we would have two come-from-behind wins rather than one.

 

[Mpskinne]

There's no denying clemson holds a 60/40 lifetime lead on South Carolina head-to-head but it's been so much better since Steve Spurrier took over ... and that's playing against FAR SUPERIOR competition.

What would happen if we 'switched' schedules with clemson? Well, let's see what HAS happened.

LIFETIME against the SEC clemson is 45- 96-5 for a success rate of .3191%
LIFETIME against the SEC So Caro is 95-166-8 for a success rate of .3639%

BUT, in the last 10-years since Spurrier's arrival the Gamecocks are 44-37 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .5432% (and that COUNTS last night)

While, in the last 10 years clemson is 9-11 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .4500%

Head-to-head in the last 10-years SC is 6-4 vs. clemson for a success rate of 60%
Head-to-head vs. SC in the last 10-years clemson is 4-6 for a success rate of 40%

It's evident that if clemson had been playing SC's schedule the last 23-years they would have fared FAR LESS SUCCESSFUL than the 'record' they consistently brag about.

And it's VERY CLEAR that since Spurrier arrived USC has done FAR BETTER against both 'common opponents' and vs. clemson head-to-head.

clemson was a 'terror' years ago in the ACC and they certainly terrorized us, too - especially from the 70's - 90's but it's CRYSTAL they don't 'terrorize' us any more and they NEVER TERRORIZED the SEC, where we have to play great teams almost EVERY WEEK.

clemson said 'give me the facts' ... well, the FACTS ARE that LIFETIME against the toughest competition in America we beat you by nearly FIVE PERCENTAGE POINTS, and as ANY head-to-head politician will attest, THAT is a STOMP "head-to-head".

Clemson was playing UGA, AU, BAMA, and LSU during this time period...usc just lost to UK in FOOTBALL! Please, give it up with talking about Clemson. CU has the all time record and beat usc in the most recent meeting on the football field. Your team lost!! Deal with it!!!

 

[CockofEarle]

There's no denying clemson holds a 60/40 lifetime lead on South Carolina head-to-head but it's been so much better since Steve Spurrier took over ... and that's playing against FAR SUPERIOR competition.

What would happen if we 'switched' schedules with clemson? Well, let's see what HAS happened.

LIFETIME against the SEC clemson is 45- 96-5 for a success rate of .3191%
LIFETIME against the SEC So Caro is 95-166-8 for a success rate of .3639%

BUT, in the last 10-years since Spurrier's arrival the Gamecocks are 44-37 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .5432% (and that COUNTS last night)

While, in the last 10 years clemson is 9-11 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .4500%

Head-to-head in the last 10-years SC is 6-4 vs. clemson for a success rate of 60%
Head-to-head vs. SC in the last 10-years clemson is 4-6 for a success rate of 40%

It's evident that if clemson had been playing SC's schedule the last 23-years they would have fared FAR LESS SUCCESSFUL than the 'record' they consistently brag about.

And it's VERY CLEAR that since Spurrier arrived USC has done FAR BETTER against both 'common opponents' and vs. clemson head-to-head.

clemson was a 'terror' years ago in the ACC and they certainly terrorized us, too - especially from the 70's - 90's but it's CRYSTAL they don't 'terrorize' us any more and they NEVER TERRORIZED the SEC, where we have to play great teams almost EVERY WEEK.

clemson said 'give me the facts' ... well, the FACTS ARE that LIFETIME against the toughest competition in America we beat you by nearly FIVE PERCENTAGE POINTS, and as ANY head-to-head politician will attest, THAT is a STOMP "head-to-head".

don't come out half steppin' ...............maybe we both should have stayed n socon.

 

[uscusc1987]

Jeff, really STFU and why don't you stop. If you don't like the comments about Clempson ignore it. They do the exact same thing. Your a damn weirdo. I'm sick of you and I know so are many others.

 

[CalmTranquility]

Jeff, really STFU and why don't you stop. If you don't like the comments about Clempson ignore it. They do the exact same thing. Your a damn weirdo. I'm sick of you and I know so are many others.

Wow...

 

[island mind]

There's no denying clemson holds a 60/40 lifetime lead on South Carolina head-to-head but it's been so much better since Steve Spurrier took over ... and that's playing against FAR SUPERIOR competition.

What would happen if we 'switched' schedules with clemson? Well, let's see what HAS happened.

LIFETIME against the SEC clemson is 45- 96-5 for a success rate of .3191%
LIFETIME against the SEC So Caro is 95-166-8 for a success rate of .3639%

BUT, in the last 10-years since Spurrier's arrival the Gamecocks are 44-37 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .5432% (and that COUNTS last night)

While, in the last 10 years clemson is 9-11 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .4500%

Head-to-head in the last 10-years SC is 6-4 vs. clemson for a success rate of 60%
Head-to-head vs. SC in the last 10-years clemson is 4-6 for a success rate of 40%

It's evident that if clemson had been playing SC's schedule the last 23-years they would have fared FAR LESS SUCCESSFUL than the 'record' they consistently brag about.

And it's VERY CLEAR that since Spurrier arrived USC has done FAR BETTER against both 'common opponents' and vs. clemson head-to-head.

clemson was a 'terror' years ago in the ACC and they certainly terrorized us, too - especially from the 70's - 90's but it's CRYSTAL they don't 'terrorize' us any more and they NEVER TERRORIZED the SEC, where we have to play great teams almost EVERY WEEK.

clemson said 'give me the facts' ... well, the FACTS ARE that LIFETIME against the toughest competition in America we beat you by nearly FIVE PERCENTAGE POINTS, and as ANY head-to-head politician will attest, THAT is a STOMP "head-to-head".

Are you just switching schedules or conferences? The SEC money/prestige counts for a lot. Would hate to see clem recruit with the SEC moniker on their side. And if it wasn't for the SEC, Holtz or Spurrier would not be roaming the sidelines of Williams Brice. So you're question - on face value - is they would probably fair no better. But it's an apples and oranges comparison IMHO.

 

[Mpskinne]

There's no denying clemson holds a 60/40 lifetime lead on South Carolina head-to-head but it's been so much better since Steve Spurrier took over ... and that's playing against FAR SUPERIOR competition.

What would happen if we 'switched' schedules with clemson? Well, let's see what HAS happened.

LIFETIME against the SEC clemson is 45- 96-5 for a success rate of .3191%
LIFETIME against the SEC So Caro is 95-166-8 for a success rate of .3639%

BUT, in the last 10-years since Spurrier's arrival the Gamecocks are 44-37 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .5432% (and that COUNTS last night)

While, in the last 10 years clemson is 9-11 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .4500%

Head-to-head in the last 10-years SC is 6-4 vs. clemson for a success rate of 60%
Head-to-head vs. SC in the last 10-years clemson is 4-6 for a success rate of 40%

It's evident that if clemson had been playing SC's schedule the last 23-years they would have fared FAR LESS SUCCESSFUL than the 'record' they consistently brag about.

And it's VERY CLEAR that since Spurrier arrived USC has done FAR BETTER against both 'common opponents' and vs. clemson head-to-head.

clemson was a 'terror' years ago in the ACC and they certainly terrorized us, too - especially from the 70's - 90's but it's CRYSTAL they don't 'terrorize' us any more and they NEVER TERRORIZED the SEC, where we have to play great teams almost EVERY WEEK.

clemson said 'give me the facts' ... well, the FACTS ARE that LIFETIME against the toughest competition in America we beat you by nearly FIVE PERCENTAGE POINTS, and as ANY head-to-head politician will attest, THAT is a STOMP "head-to-head".

Here are some FACTS (as of 2014). Your all time record has been held up with wins againt UK, MSU, and Vandy....who cares if you play against the "best competition" in american if you are not winning???? Every program is the sum of it's historial 'parts' or wins. Its why Bama, AU, LSU, UGA, and TENN can have down years but are able to fall back on their history and tradition to pull top coaches, recuite top talent, and ultimately return to winning titles. All-in-all usc is what their all-time record is... an average to below average football program.
South Carolina vs Alabama (3-12) .200
South Carolina vs Arkansas (8-13) .381
South Carolina vs Auburn (1-9-1) .100*
South Carolina vs Florida (6-24-3) .200
South Carolina vs Georgia (17-46-2) .270
South Carolina vs Kentucky (16-7-1) .696
South Carolina vs LSU (2-17-1) .105
South Carolina vs Mississippi State (8-6) .571
South Carolina vs Ole Miss (7-8) .467
South Carolina vs Tennessee (7-22-2) .241
South Carolina vs Vanderbilt (18-4) .818#
South Carolina vs Texas A&M (0-0) .000 Now 0-1
South Carolina vs Missouri (1-2) .333

 

[colaheat]

There's no denying clemson holds a 60/40 lifetime lead on South Carolina head-to-head but it's been so much better since Steve Spurrier took over ... and that's playing against FAR SUPERIOR competition.

What would happen if we 'switched' schedules with clemson? Well, let's see what HAS happened.

LIFETIME against the SEC clemson is 45- 96-5 for a success rate of .3191%
LIFETIME against the SEC So Caro is 95-166-8 for a success rate of .3639%

BUT, in the last 10-years since Spurrier's arrival the Gamecocks are 44-37 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .5432% (and that COUNTS last night)

While, in the last 10 years clemson is 9-11 vs. the SEC for a success rate of .4500%

Head-to-head in the last 10-years SC is 6-4 vs. clemson for a success rate of 60%
Head-to-head vs. SC in the last 10-years clemson is 4-6 for a success rate of 40%

It's evident that if clemson had been playing SC's schedule the last 23-years they would have fared FAR LESS SUCCESSFUL than the 'record' they consistently brag about.

And it's VERY CLEAR that since Spurrier arrived USC has done FAR BETTER against both 'common opponents' and vs. clemson head-to-head.

clemson was a 'terror' years ago in the ACC and they certainly terrorized us, too - especially from the 70's - 90's but it's CRYSTAL they don't 'terrorize' us any more and they NEVER TERRORIZED the SEC, where we have to play great teams almost EVERY WEEK.

clemson said 'give me the facts' ... well, the FACTS ARE that LIFETIME against the toughest competition in America we beat you by nearly FIVE PERCENTAGE POINTS, and as ANY head-to-head politician will attest, THAT is a STOMP "head-to-head".

Fuzzy Math Dude

 

[CalmTranquility]

Damn!!

 

[the-iceman]

Good stuff. Query: if a 59 % winning percentage is Domination per Dabo, is it not fair, in Dabo speak, to say we have Dominated Clemson for the last decade, since we've won 60% in that time?

 

[Clemalum07]

Jeff, really STFU and why don't you stop. If you don't like the comments about Clempson ignore it. They do the exact same thing. Your a damn weirdo. I'm sick of you and I know so are many others.

Why are you and SS1 so full of vitriol and hatred?

 

[cocks25]

2-2 against Missouri since 2005 so I know that ones wrong

 

[G-Man!!!]

Again, is this what Carolina posters do when they don't win? Comparing your program to one that is winning and showing more promise. This must make you feel better about the loss and the not so good record that looms for the Carolina football program.

OP, Just stop........way too much time spent on this......does make me laugh though...

What if, what if, what if a bullfrog had wings? Answer is - He wouldn't bump his a$$ every time he jumped...

 

[WilliamstonDawgHater1]

Hey MPSkinne, how is your hero Tajh Boyd doing in the NFL? Oh wait...

 

[superflyby]

SS1....OK dude I get it....but....clemsux would have beaten both teams we played and we would have beaten both teams they played....maybe. That really proves nothing at this point. If we played today, clemsux would win....I can't say about November because so much can change between now and then.