My vote would be Clempson in the SEC. Don't think it will happen. Clempson would certainly compete at football, but not at the level they are in the ACC. I hear, but we've beat Alabama twice. You've also lost twice and blown out by LSU two years ago. What ACC teams do they struggle against? Zero. The chance of winning conference championships in football would diminish greatly. Baseball would be much more difficult for Clempson in the SEC. Women's basketball and softball would be a disaster. The only sport where things might be a little easier is mens basketball, but not much. The ACC hasn't been the national power in basketball for years.
What would be better? Clempson left out in the cold or having to compete in the SEC?
- Thread starter uscusc1987
- Start date
My vote is "hell no". Looks like we are headed to super conferences, so let them join Ohio State and some other big schools. This will keep them out of the best conference in the country while making their path to national titles harder. Maybe we could get back to landing some highly rated in state kids when going head to head if they fell a notch or two. Unfortunately, we will probably end up adding them and FSU.
No way do I want them
In the SEC. As if they need another recruiting pitch; “Come play for us in the best conference in the nation”. Whatever advantage that gives us over them in recruiting, we need to maintain. That and more conference money…. Nope. Keep them on the outside looking in.
In the SEC. As if they need another recruiting pitch; “Come play for us in the best conference in the nation”. Whatever advantage that gives us over them in recruiting, we need to maintain. That and more conference money…. Nope. Keep them on the outside looking in.
So now they are "on the outside looking in" as you say and how is that working out? They are on an incredible run which will continue for the foreseeable future. They will be preseason #1 or #2 again. They have a clear ticket each year into the CFP playing an ACC schedule and the sports media is simply unwilling to hold them to task for playing such a soft schedule ever year. I believe playing an SEC schedule they would lose 2-3 games per year (sometimes more) which would make it much more difficult to get in the CFP. They out-recruit us now because they are currently one of the top 4 elite programs in the nation. And it's sickening.
I could actually see a trade in the works. SEC takes Clemson, USC goes to the ACC
Never happen. Money talks and the ACC can't pony up the same dollars. You do not remember how we were treated when in the ACC? We would still be a middle of the pack team there as evidenced by our record against ACC teams over the last 10 years. So what is the advantage for USC? None.
The ACC without Clemson is just a warmed over Big East. Hope the conference gets poached with only the NC schools left. Karma is gonna get them for the way they treated innocent USC. USC, a founding member, they just kicked to the curb.
Would like to see Clemson in the SEC. We gripe about Clemson not keeping their promise and leaving with us but the SEC might have chosen Clemson over USC in '92.
Would like to see Clemson in the SEC. We gripe about Clemson not keeping their promise and leaving with us but the SEC might have chosen Clemson over USC in '92.
They only care about football….PERIOD. Sure some care about other sports but if you look at the moves the ad has made the last ten years it’s obvious.
Uhhhhh.....NO. We appear to have a Head Coach in football who can definitely recruit. If he is able to combine that with the coaching ability of his Dad, why would we disadvantage him by putting him into the ACC? It makes no sense.
If Clemson comes into the SEC, that's OK. They will no longer have the advantage of playing just a couple of difficult conference games a year, spaced out, and thus easily getting into the playoffs. Things will be on an even footing. My hunch is that Dabo prefers the status quo. And who can blame him?
I see that you are not familiar with Ray Tanner or the UofSC Board of Trustees.
Pick any schedule in the sec and show me 2-3 def loses. I’m not a Clemson fan but damn take the red colored glasses off. They recruit better than us because they put players in the nfl and have a better coaching staff. Sure their success helps but they recruited at a high level before that success. Look at their record vs the sec over the last 8 years.
That is currently more in jeopardy than people want to realize. If the sec goes to 20 or 4 super conferences are formed, that may just be all she wrote.
BOT yes. Tanner....no, a decision like this is way above his pay grade or any ADs.
This is the only way it will continue. I posted yesterday I give it two more years as it stands.
The person above making the point about the easy schedule guarantees a playoff spot. If they didn't make the playoff every year recruiting drops off. They would have a much more difficult time making the playoff going through a sec schedule that usually features a matchup with Bama in Atlanta. Those talking about how great they have been. In the playoff they are 2-3 against the sec. 2-2 against Bama. 0-1 against LSU. You do realize had they been in the sec those 5 games and 3 losses would have been in the SEC championship game rather than the CFP. They benefit greatly from playing in a conference with no other top 5 team(s).
I would love them to join. If we kept 8 team conference then it frees up another game to add a possible win outside of SEC play.
Clemson would go from elite to on par with the rest of the better teams in the SEC almost immediately. The ACC schedule is by far the biggest reason they've become elite to this day.
I can't say I want them in the SEC but it would be nice to see them actually play some games with teams that can compete with them on a regular basis. Like others have said, I don't think there's much chance Clemson will want to leave a conference that's basically put them where they are today through lack of competition.
I can't say I want them in the SEC but it would be nice to see them actually play some games with teams that can compete with them on a regular basis. Like others have said, I don't think there's much chance Clemson will want to leave a conference that's basically put them where they are today through lack of competition.
This!!! There is now way they go through an SEC schedule without a loss or two and this is with their most recent best teams. They would not be able to play as many players and build the depth that they do and they would have wear and tear of the season that they don't have with an ACC schedule.
A school dumb enough to leave the SEC and turn down all that money while multiple schools would sell their souls to join. No one's leaving the SEC.
USC left the ACC. Not the other way around. And they left to get away from higher ACC academics
Clemson is among the upper echelon in facilities in the ACC, close to having the best, if not the best. In the SEC, they would be mid-tier. They are a football school playing in a basketball-first conference. Anyone thinking Dabo wants to give up that advantage, is simply not thinking clearly. Years ago there was talk of Clemson switching to the SEC. I recall Dabo being interviewed and asked about that. You would have thought that someone had slapped him in the face with that question. He got incensed and yelled, "We are not going anywhere. Clemson is the ACC".
It’s not his decision. Again this is bigger than just football.
I agree with you. I'm responding to the question whether Clemson is better off in the SEC or left in the cold (ACC). There's no question in my mind, nor Dabo's, they are better off in the ACC. But, Dabo's not the tail wagging the dog in that matter.
Not entirely true either. They mainly left due to the way USC was being singled out and treated by the North Carolina big 4 schools. They controlled the votes in the Conference and eventually passed the following which is why we left. Academics partially but being under a different set of rules than the other conference schools was not right. Please read below.
It is for this flagrant disregard for constitutional authority, that this office… Declares that any student-athlete presently enrolled or incoming at the University of South Carolina whose eligibility is questioned be withheld from participation unless and until it is established to the complete satisfaction of the conference that there has been no violation in each individual case.”
It was tantamount to “guilty until proven innocent”. It was this mandate, which applied to the University of South Carolina and to no other ACC institution, which would ensnare Frank McGuire’s highest-rated recruit, Mike Grosso, as well as many of Dietzel’s recruits in years to come.
Yes I remember the Grosso situation. Seems there was another recruit that was apparently a marginal student McGuire tried to get that caused a stink too.
Not so much that we have a recruiting advantage, because it’s clear that we are not recruiting better than them. Offering kids the chance to play in the best conference is something we have going for us that they don’t. (If they’re in the SEC, they can offer that too.) That’s what I meant (poorly worded). And no, that hasn’t made enough of a difference over the last 6-8yrs for us anyway.
The single most foolish athletic move USC ever made was leaving the ACC. Joining the SEC was a no-brainer.
This treatment was brought about by McGuire's chip-on-the-shoulder attitude, that he and Eddie Cameron did not get along, and Dietzel's misguided visions of grandeur.
Also note that for the first decade or so of the ACC's existence, the non-big 4 members essentially invested zero in their hoops program.
Clemron actually (and surprisingly) made it to the basketball tournament finals in 1962, losing to Wake. Afterwards, NCSU courted Press Maravich (the Pistol's father and Tater head coach) for an assistant position under Everett Case, and offered him more money than Clemron was paying him. AD & head football coach Frank Howard made no attempt to keep Press in the upstate. This is an excellent example of why I think it's a conflict of interest for the AD to also be the head coach of a sport at the school.
Until we won the basketball title in 1971, Maryland's 1958 championship was the only one won by a non-big 4 member.
In the league's early years, Maryland had a bad reputation of not emphasizing academics enough, which manifested itself in the Terrapins' competitive slide by the early '60 as they placed more emphasis on academics.
USC's hiring of Frank McGuire in 1964 was the first time a non-big 4 member seriously invested in competing in ACC basketball. In general, I think most ACC officials shook their heads at USC hiring Frank given the circumstances under which he left Chapel Hell.
I believe that had Frank Howard made a successful effort at retaining Press, and the Taters had enjoyed sustained hoops success throughout the '60s, there would not have been the controversies surrounding them that surrounded McGuire and USC by extension.
All this to essentially say that the ACC did not have it in for USC due to sustained hoops success; it was leftover bad blood between McGuire and the league, which made it's way south to Columbia, with USC in the crossfire.
Clemron actually (and surprisingly) made it to the basketball tournament finals in 1962, losing to Wake. Afterwards, NCSU courted Press Maravich (the Pistol's father and Tater head coach) for an assistant position under Everett Case, and offered him more money than Clemron was paying him. AD & head football coach Frank Howard made no attempt to keep Press in the upstate. This is an excellent example of why I think it's a conflict of interest for the AD to also be the head coach of a sport at the school.
Until we won the basketball title in 1971, Maryland's 1958 championship was the only one won by a non-big 4 member.
In the league's early years, Maryland had a bad reputation of not emphasizing academics enough, which manifested itself in the Terrapins' competitive slide by the early '60 as they placed more emphasis on academics.
USC's hiring of Frank McGuire in 1964 was the first time a non-big 4 member seriously invested in competing in ACC basketball. In general, I think most ACC officials shook their heads at USC hiring Frank given the circumstances under which he left Chapel Hell.
I believe that had Frank Howard made a successful effort at retaining Press, and the Taters had enjoyed sustained hoops success throughout the '60s, there would not have been the controversies surrounding them that surrounded McGuire and USC by extension.
All this to essentially say that the ACC did not have it in for USC due to sustained hoops success; it was leftover bad blood between McGuire and the league, which made it's way south to Columbia, with USC in the crossfire.
Really? A team that loses to Notre Dame, Syracuse and BC would tear through the SEC? LOL. Plus you point out that lose twice to Bama and once to LSU. All that would have been in Atlanta and not the CFP. It hurts the program.
