|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
Asst Coach [743]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 609
Joined: 9/8/00
|
Anyone that doesn’t think clemson is a traditional
Mar 23, 2021, 12:43 PM
|
|
Power also thinks that Clemson football started with Dabo. Big mistake to think this.
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [9050]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 13813
Joined: 7/1/02
|
It depends on the time period/era people think of......
Mar 23, 2021, 2:24 PM
|
|
A lot of young people think it DID start with DS. But guys my age (65) and older remember that Frank Howard had successful winning seasons, etc. And, of course, 1981 and Danny Ford and the teams he had.
It's just like the way a lot of young people think about our players. They tend to think that our great players started with DS or maybe "way back" with DF - don't want to give credit to players who played for FH.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27295]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10089
Joined: 2/14/13
|
Re: It depends on the time period/era people think of......
Mar 23, 2021, 3:10 PM
|
|
There’s also the 1948 undefeated season where technically we won the National Championship but it was given to Nebraska.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [746]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 567
Joined: 11/13/03
|
Michigan was actually the national champ in 1948
Mar 23, 2021, 3:30 PM
|
|
Clemson and Michigan were the only two undefeated teams in 1948. Michigan finished number 1 and out Tigers finished 11th. Talk about no respect playing in the Southern Conference at the time.
My Dad played on the Tigers '48 team and had great Frank Howard stories.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27295]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10089
Joined: 2/14/13
|
Re: Michigan was actually the national champ in 1948
Mar 23, 2021, 7:26 PM
|
|
Whoops thanks for correcting me. I had the confuse
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83011]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80126
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Define Traditional Power. It's true we had some great
Mar 23, 2021, 3:46 PM
|
|
seasons and great bowl wins under Frank Howard in the 40s and 50s, but we were embarrassed more often than not against elite teams from the SEC and other schools like Oklahoma and Southern Cal.
Bama, Auburn, UGA, and GT consistently beat us over and over. Just look at our history against those schools.
We also had some great years under Danny in the 80s, but were never consistently elite. We only went to one major bowl between 1959 and 2014, 1981.
We didn't become an elite program ever until Dabo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40736]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10675
Joined: 6/23/17
|
Re: Define Traditional Power. It's true we had some great
Mar 23, 2021, 5:40 PM
|
|
He didn’t say elite he said traditional power. We were a top 25 program all time before Dabo got started. I would consider a top 25 program a traditional power. Elite? Yeah that’s uncharted territory for us to be consistently among the elite but Clemson was one of the better programs in CFB before Dabo ever set foot on campus. It is true that we didn’t fare well against some elite programs historically but Clemson football has a great tradition and its one that many programs wish they had.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1722]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1297
Joined: 9/3/07
|
Re: Define Traditional Power. It's true we had some great
Mar 23, 2021, 6:41 PM
[ in reply to Define Traditional Power. It's true we had some great ] |
|
The bowl system itself helped keep some deserving teams from “big” bowls. 1978 comes to mind. Not to mention probation for the 1982 and 1983 teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6825]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6350
Joined: 7/20/18
|
Re: Anyone that doesn’t think clemson is a traditional
Mar 23, 2021, 4:04 PM
|
|
I disagree there.
Here is an example: Villanova IS a "traditional" power in basketball. I hope no-one objects to that now.
All of their national titles are "recent" and basically on the same timeline as our football team. Prior to that, they had one decent "national spotlight" season in '71 and then one in '39. Sounds kinda like us.
However, while they were not nation title contenders in BB prior to 1984 (or at least only had one run) that were MUCH stronger than you average team. They were you consistent NCAA/sweetsixteen team. Sure, they could never really top many of the true "blue bloods" of the era, they still dominated their little area. They were on the outside edge of that "elite" status for decades, had their breakout moment and then join the group as a top 20/25 program.
Sure, prior to Danny, we had a few good seasons and we might not have been on the same level as GT/Jawja/ND but we were building, had a stable winning coach and most of the time, the ACC trophy went through us at some point - if not we were holding it.
We are the traditional football power of the ACC. Fight me if you disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [282]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 395
Joined: 5/30/20
|
Re: Anyone that doesn’t think clemson is a traditional
Mar 23, 2021, 4:18 PM
|
|
Most people traditionally view history within the perspective of their own lifespan and experiences. Nothing new here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48147]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14875
Joined: 11/7/20
|
Re: Anyone that doesn’t think clemson is a traditional
Mar 23, 2021, 4:21 PM
|
|
What most don't understand is how stacked the deck was against us in the Frank Howard and Danny era. Not only did players get perks at the traditional blue blood schools, they also had about 200 players.... Something the small little cow school couldn't compete with. Then there was the media that essentially handed out: everything out.
That's why I really don't put a whole lot of weight on national championships before 1970. Now that the playing field is leveling out, you don't find those traditional blue bloods doing much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4101]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4363
Joined: 10/22/14
|
Re: Anyone that doesn’t think clemson is a traditional
Mar 23, 2021, 8:37 PM
|
|
Excellent point. How many National Championships can Minnesota claim? Now how many since say..1950? How about Harvard/Yale? ok.. How about MEECHIGAN or even...gasp.. Notre Dame. it used to just he awarded by the media. kind of like the media controls other things now, sports writers once told the nation how to think. BTW, most of those sports writers were in bigger, Nortnern or NE cities which is how you got schools like Maryland and Minnesota being awarded Titles. The sportswriters of the Chicago Tribune and Baltimore Sun had more to do with it than play on the field imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4101]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4363
Joined: 10/22/14
|
Re: Anyone that doesn’t think clemson is a traditional
Mar 23, 2021, 8:42 PM
|
|
BTW, my theory here also coincides with why it will be difficult to ever win a Heisman. We are not surrounded by a ton of Sports Media pundits, and the ones we DO have, say in Atlanta all are going to be saying SEC, SEC. Meanwhile within 60 minutes of Columbus there are at least 6 major Cities with Big J "Journalists ". Same for Oklahoma (Dallas) and to a lesser extent LA if USC ever gets good again. Sports media tells the masses what to believe still today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9048
Joined: 2/22/00
|
Re: Anyone that doesn’t think clemson is a traditional
Mar 23, 2021, 5:50 PM
|
|
there are 130 schools playing D-1 football. Clemson is 14th in the number of all time wins with 768. This puts us in rarified air. WE are 20th in alltime winning% ...Pretty good stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
