Started By
Message
re: How bad does Clemson want to be in the SEC?
Posted on 10/25/17 at 5:58 pm to DawgsLife
Posted on 10/25/17 at 5:58 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
Odd that Clemson fans seem to think football began 5 years ago, though. hard to blame them, though.
BTW, 3 years ago you lost three games. That's a major power to you?
If you look at their history...the last 5 years or so is the only thing they can brag about. Yeah, they won a NC in 1981 but everyone outside of Clemson knows they cheated their asses off to get that.
1
Posted on 10/25/17 at 6:12 pm to CobraCommander83
In the 1980's everyone cheated, its why we have all these rules today.
This thread has gotten off topic.
One of the Clemson fans should go runtelldat to taternet and get some Clemson fans in here to explain why they are happy to be in the ACC, with no interest in the SEC.
That's the whole point of this thread.
I want serious discussion, dammit.
This thread has gotten off topic.
One of the Clemson fans should go runtelldat to taternet and get some Clemson fans in here to explain why they are happy to be in the ACC, with no interest in the SEC.
That's the whole point of this thread.
I want serious discussion, dammit.
Posted on 10/25/17 at 6:38 pm to deeprig9
quote:
One of the Clemson fans should go runtelldat to taternet and get some Clemson fans in here to explain why they are happy to be in the ACC, with no interest in the SEC.
I'm sure the fans over at that site are bigger dumb asses than the current Clemson trolls on this site. However, I am curious to the OP's original question and would like to hear their reasoning. I'm sure one of the biggest reasons that they prob. will not admit is that it is an easier path to the playoffs. I mean...are they really happy to play Syracuse on a Friday night or play in Boston on a Saturday at noon with 20 to 30 thousand people in the stands? In other words and other than the easy conference schedule....what does the ACC offer in terms of football that is better than what the SEC offers?
Posted on 10/25/17 at 7:12 pm to CobraCommander83
quote:
I'm sure one of the biggest reasons that they prob. will not admit is that it is an easier path to the playoffs
Why would a Clemson fan not admit that?
Are you telling me you'd rather play, and perhaps lose, tough games every week and never win a championship than play a handful of tough games and win one? I don't agree that UGA plays any tougher a schedule than Clemson; if anything it's been easier the past few years, but the point you're trying to make doesn't make sense.
Big on those moral victories, huh? Does losing bring you some strange joy? The SEC myth has been busted, and it doesn't carry the same weight it did. You can thank the bottom feeders in your conference for that. There are good teams in every conference these days.
Posted on 10/25/17 at 7:23 pm to SlowEasyConfident
UGA already has a "natty" under the belt. The only reason Clemson won last year against Bama is because Bama's RB got hurt. Clemson got lucky
Posted on 10/25/17 at 8:27 pm to CocknDawg
quote:
Plus there are four votes against them: South Carolina, Tennessee, Florida and Georgia.
Actually, there are six votes against Clemson (counting Tennessee). A&M and Kentucky would vote against them also. We don't want tu in the SEC, and I'm sure Kentucky feels that way about Louisville.
This post was edited on 10/25/17 at 8:31 pm
Posted on 10/25/17 at 8:41 pm to deeprig9
We should have added them instead of Missouri.
Posted on 10/25/17 at 8:44 pm to IStillMissDanny
quote:
Are you telling me you'd rather play, and perhaps lose, tough games every week and never win a championship than play a handful of tough games and win one? I don't agree that UGA plays any tougher a schedule than Clemson; if anything it's been easier the past few years, but the point you're trying to make doesn't make sense.
Big on those moral victories, huh? Does losing bring you some strange joy? The SEC myth has been busted, and it doesn't carry the same weight it did. You can thank the bottom feeders in your conference for that. There are good teams in every conference these days.
You'd really rather play weak teams for the majority, if not all, of your schedule? Sure, the SEC is down now relative to the way it was during that seven year NC run, but that string of champions happened because we played a tough schedule week after week.
If your sentiment reflects that of Clemson's overall fanbase, you're not worthy of being in the SEC.
Posted on 10/25/17 at 9:28 pm to Sid E Walker
quote:
You'd really rather play weak teams for the majority, if not all, of your schedule? Sure, the SEC is down now relative to the way it was during that seven year NC run, but that string of champions happened because we played a tough schedule week after week. If your sentiment reflects that of Clemson's overall fanbase, you're not worthy of being in the SEC.
The ACC ain't that weak anymore, when a rising Miami, FSU, Virginia Tech, NC State, Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, and, in another two years when Pitt loads up. I think the only teams we could throw at Clemson or Miami with a reasonable chance of winning are Bama, LSU and Georgia.
I ain't no ACC fan by a damn sight, but the truth is the truth. And I live in the middle of of ACC country, just south of Charlotte.
And the truth is the only teams I really follow closely and care about are my alma mater, South Carolina and my first favorite college team, Georgia.
And I pull for the SEC in every ooc game.
Posted on 10/25/17 at 9:47 pm to CocknDawg
quote:
The ACC ain't that weak anymore, when a rising Miami, FSU, Virginia Tech, NC State, Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, and, in another two years when Pitt loads up.
FSU sucks.
VT sucks.
GT sucks.
Miami could be good.
Nc St is good.
Notre Dame is good, but do you really call them ACC just because they joined the ACC in basketball only? They aren't an ACC football team.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 11:52 am to SlowEasyConfident
quote:
What conference does Lamar Jackson play in ?
Do you mean LSU's bitch, that Lamar Jackson?
It doesn't matter since he isn't really impressive, anyway.
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 11:54 am
Posted on 10/26/17 at 11:59 am to The Balinese Club
quote:
and I'm sure Kentucky feels that way about Louisville.
Louisville obviously doesn't belong in the SEC. If they were in it last year, they would have been an extremely average team without a Heisman Trophy winner. LSU proved that in the bowl game.
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 12:00 pm
Posted on 10/26/17 at 12:01 pm to sardog12
Kentucky proved it first
Posted on 10/26/17 at 1:15 pm to Sid E Walker
quote:
You'd really rather play weak teams for the majority, if not all, of your schedule? Sure, the SEC is down now relative to the way it was during that seven year NC run, but that string of champions happened because we played a tough schedule week after week.
If your sentiment reflects that of Clemson's overall fanbase, you're not worthy of being in the SEC.
OK, Commissioner.
Strength of Scehdule 2017
Looks like Clemson plays a pretty tough schedule - #3.
6 of the top 25 are ACC, 4 are SEC.
Huh. Imagine that. I know that doesn't fit the SEC, SEC narrative, but there it is. Clemson doesn't need the SEC to win big or sell tickets. Great fan support, coaches, administrative leadership is All In, plenty of money for campus upgrades, and winning football championships. A founding member of the conference. Great rivalries with GT and FSU that the players and fans care about. Let's not forget that the ACC is the king of MBB, either.
Exactly why would Clemson leave?
More money? Bigger away games?
What has that extra money gotten the SEC? Y'all have 4 teams that haven't won a conference game yet. Just 4 teams ranked in the top 25. Teams with self-imposed penalties. Half the schools have coaches on firing watch.
What is Clemson supposed to be jealous of here?
And we still get to beat the shite out of USCe, whichever conference we're in.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 1:27 pm to IStillMissDanny
quote:
Strength of Scehdule 2017
He says the SEC was strong during the 7 year Natty run because we played tough schedules and you counter with a 2017 SOS comparison?
Did you not understand what he said? he admitted that the SEC is in a down year THIS year. His point was the SEC was so tough during the title run because we played tough teams.
Right over your head, or you are willfully ignoring plain logic.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 1:29 pm to deeprig9
The fact that Clemson routinely out-recruits South Carolina, even though South Carolina in the SEC, is unspeakably embarrassing.
Posted on 10/26/17 at 1:36 pm to TeLeFaWx
Yeah I bet A&M has Texas locked down with the Longhorns struggling 
Posted on 10/26/17 at 1:39 pm to CNB
quote:
Yeah I bet A&M has Texas locked down with the Longhorns struggling
Makes sense. A&M is in the SEC, so they must win recruiting in Texas every year, right?
ETA
Over the last 10 years it appears as if Texas wins the recruiting battle more often than not. A&M DOES seem to be making a little headway, though, and are coming closer to breaking even the past several years.
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 10/26/17 at 1:42 pm to CNB
quote:
Yeah I bet A&M has Texas locked down with the Longhorns struggling
They didn’t have a top 25 recruiting class last cycle...
Posted on 10/26/17 at 1:45 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
They didn’t have a top 25 recruiting class last cycle...
And A&M was 13th. Over the last 10 years Texas wins easily, and over the last 6 or so it is pretty much even.
ETA
Actually, according to the composite, Texas was 25th.
This post was edited on 10/26/17 at 1:46 pm
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News