|
Replies: 54
| visibility 1
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 8:57 AM
|
|
Just making sure everyone is paying attention
Clemson VS SEC
Overall W120-L169
East
vs. Kentucky W5-L8
vs. Vandy W1-L3
vs. Georgia W18-L41
vs. Tenn W6-L11
vs. UF W3-L9
vs. Mizz W3-L1
vs. SC W65-L42
vs East W101-L115
West
vs. Bama W3-L12
vs. LSU W1-L2
vs. MISS ST W1-L1
vs. MISS W0-L2
vs. Ark DNP
vs. TAMU W1-L3
vs. Auburn W13-L34
vs West W19-L54
Overall W120-L169
Win % vs SEC 41%
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [11161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10900
Joined: 9/17/07
|
Check your coot records while you're at it.***
Nov 13, 2014, 9:20 AM
|
|
The teams you play every year in the SECLEAST: 71-105 with 37 wins coming against powerhouses vandy and kentucky.
Message was edited by: cutigersJD®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Check your coot records while you're at it.***
Nov 13, 2014, 9:53 AM
|
|
No doubt...we definitely should. There isn't any rational Gamecock that would tout our football history.
Everything I hear from Pickens county is how well Clemson would do in the SEC yet the records don't show it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5249]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7625
Joined: 3/5/12
|
You forget we'd get that "SEC bump" for recruiting
Nov 13, 2014, 9:56 AM
|
|
Not to mention TAMU and Mizzou seemed to gain super powers by wearing the SEC logo.
Well, maybe not super powers since they're actually bad, but I'm sure by comparison they look that way
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 17413
Joined: 8/9/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Check your coot records while you're at it.***
Nov 13, 2014, 10:30 AM
|
|
yet Clemson's best case scenario is going .500 against it? Clemson could get swept by the SECE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4774]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 7611
Joined: 12/17/11
|
LOL
Nov 13, 2014, 2:06 PM
|
|
this guy...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: LOL
Nov 13, 2014, 2:08 PM
|
|
states facts...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6653
Joined: 9/1/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6653
Joined: 9/1/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [134505]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 26395
Joined: 9/18/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64590]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88995
Joined: 3/27/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1099]
TigerPulse: 53%
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10/15/13
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 9:21 AM
|
|
Here is what I saw:
vs. SC W65-L42
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10900
Joined: 9/17/07
|
LOL, they'd need a 23-peat to tie the series.
Nov 13, 2014, 9:24 AM
|
|
What a freaking dynasty they are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 17413
Joined: 8/9/10
|
Re: LOL, they'd need a 23-peat to tie the series.
Nov 13, 2014, 9:26 AM
|
|
Duke has a better program than the Coots
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 2:48 PM
|
|
So, CU 37 - SCAR 29 since 1944 is better from a percentage standpoint than the all time CU 65 - SCAR 42 record ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 2:50 PM
|
|
yes
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Yes, you're right.
Nov 13, 2014, 2:51 PM
|
|
57% for CU since 1944 versus 60% all time.
My bad ... you have indeed made great strides since WWII.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16908]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10770
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 2:50 PM
[ in reply to Re: Just double checking records ] |
|
Way to cherry pick and you're still on the losing end of it by 8 games. What about starting in 1934 or 1954 toolshed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 17413
Joined: 8/9/10
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 9:24 AM
|
|
How's that 4-5 record feel, oh I guess not too bad you Coots are use to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:01 AM
|
|
not real well...but we could beat UGA, UF, and Clemson and still be pretty disappointed in our season
funny how things change
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 17413
Joined: 8/9/10
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:08 AM
|
|
But your not going to beat UF or Clemson 5-7.
Then next year the D will be bad still and the O drops off big time.
No QB or Davis and you lose the whole O- line. It's going to get ugly in Cola
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21870]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15712
Joined: 10/23/12
|
but but but they have their savior....the ol ball sack
Nov 13, 2014, 10:11 AM
|
|
that huge banner is going to pay dividends....SMH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:13 AM
[ in reply to Re: Just double checking records ] |
|
we'll see...Our D can't get any worse and our O-line isn't that great anyway. Might as well shake it up. I'm sure you'd be really upset with Clemson if they lost to our team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 17413
Joined: 8/9/10
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:31 AM
|
|
I think the game could be close but no way with that crappy D does the coots win in DV. Come on now you know it's over and back to the norm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 1:41 PM
|
|
I wouldn't say no way but we're going to at least need 3 td lead in the 4th quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6653
Joined: 9/1/11
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 2:58 PM
[ in reply to Re: Just double checking records ] |
|
the only time coots are disappointed is when their big brothers lose
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [21870]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15712
Joined: 10/23/12
|
Deer dustin.....
Nov 13, 2014, 9:31 AM
|
|
I would like to point out that as a program....CLEMSON has more WINS and a higher winning % against current teams in the sec than usuc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23112]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19812
Joined: 1/15/11
|
U know everything is back to normal
Nov 13, 2014, 9:31 AM
|
|
when Coots rely on the conference to make them look better. Like I tell everyone of you Coot Idiots, YOU'VE PEAKED, now put Clemson in the SEC and give Dabo that SEC BUMP in recruiting that every SEC coach plays and no one in the Nation(much less the SEC) will be able to compete with US.What Mizzou's record again ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10900
Joined: 9/17/07
|
^^^This***
Nov 13, 2014, 9:34 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: U know everything is back to normal
Nov 13, 2014, 10:04 AM
[ in reply to U know everything is back to normal ] |
|
Clemson peaked 30 years ago so what's your point? I thought Clemson fans don't want to be in the SEC and that it's just a bunch of over ranked teams. Dabo has said as much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10900
Joined: 9/17/07
|
If we already peaked , why the concern with us?
Nov 13, 2014, 10:11 AM
|
|
Why is beating us 5 in a row such an accomplishment?
Why bring up our SEC record on our message board if you don't want our opinion of your team and/or how we'd perform in the SEC?
How does saying how we think we'd perform in the SEC indicate we want to be in the SEC?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11161]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10900
Joined: 9/17/07
|
Furthermore the SEC rankings are bloated and a joke.
Nov 13, 2014, 10:12 AM
|
|
Case in point, #9 to 4-5.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: If we already peaked , why the concern with us?
Nov 13, 2014, 10:19 AM
[ in reply to If we already peaked , why the concern with us? ] |
|
Why is beating us 5 in a row such an accomplishment?
***It's not and I didn't bring it up. I has been a fun watching it unfold. It's nice to be on the other side of the fence since we all know what happened between 97-08***
Why bring up our SEC record on our message board if you don't want our opinion of your team and/or how we'd perform in the SEC?
***Just to stir the pot***
How does saying how we think we'd perform in the SEC indicate we want to be in the SEC?
***The early comment said, if Dabo had the SEC bump no one in the Nation would be able to compete against Clemson. I don't agree.***
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: If we already peaked , why the concern with us?
Nov 13, 2014, 10:22 AM
[ in reply to If we already peaked , why the concern with us? ] |
|
plus, where is the best place to bring up clemson's record vs the SEC? Probably on a Clemson board. Seems like I'd get the best discussion of said record.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [67]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 146
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:00 AM
|
|
Hey, Dumb A--, do you know that much of those records happened before the NCAA restricted scholarships and when not everybody had to meet scholastic requirements. That record is very misleading. Back in the 40s, 50s and much of the 60s it was like Furman playing South Carolina. We occasionally won but we were at a distinct disadvantage. Oh and by the way, that is a pretty good comparison seeing as how Furman has beaten the Gamecocks. Anything from the 70s on is fair game to criticize but if you use the records prior to that, how about checking south kerliner's record against those same teams. Also, check the record against ACC opponents during that time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:09 AM
|
|
I don't know how "much of those records happened before the NCAA restricted scholarships" and I don't think you do either. I'd be glad to read one of your sources on the topic if you can link any.
While we're on the subject of Furman - Clemson has lost to Furman 10 times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16058]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 24596
Joined: 5/14/02
|
LMAO...Says the fan whose school is 27-20-1 against Furman
Nov 13, 2014, 10:36 AM
|
|
The last loss in 1982. SCAR fans should really avoid throwing out past records. They usually end up on the short end of the stick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [804]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 1292
Joined: 10/28/09
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 3:00 PM
[ in reply to Re: Just double checking records ] |
|
> While we're on the subject of Furman - Clemson has
> lost to Furman 10 times.
And Y'all have lost to them 20 times. Also the last time we lost to Furman was 1936. The last
time y'all lost to them was 1982. LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [67]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 146
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [67]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 146
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 8:44 PM
[ in reply to Re: Just double checking records ] |
|
The reason the chicks left the ACC was because they couldn't compete with the big guys with scholarship limitations and academic restrictions. They left the ACC with losing records against almost every ACC team and they won only one ACC championship. After they left the ACC they had a few significant wins, Michigan and Southern Cal during the George (loved that coke) Rogers but overall had some very tough years. Since being in the SEC, until recently, were the laughing stock of the SEC. To their credit they have had successful seasons the last few years but hardly considered a part of the SEC elite. Also, giving the devil their due, have won the state championship the last 5 years. But their overall record against Clemson is not too good. Before you throw insults at Clemson you need to be aware of the chicken's history. South Carolina was at the same disadvantage as Clemson prior to the NCAA limiting scholarships to 85. That is why both of our records against SEC teams are so skewed. It was very much like the Citadel and Furman trying to compete against us now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [36409]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21512
Joined: 10/27/03
|
Good Thing We Get to Play That Weak USUCK Team
Nov 13, 2014, 10:08 AM
|
|
If I Were The SEC I Would Boot USUCK to The MAC Where They Belong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [439]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 210
Joined: 9/8/11
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:12 AM
|
|
Gamechickens vs SEC
West:
Bama: 4W-11L
Arkansas: 9W-4L
Auburn: 1W-10L
MISS STATE: 9W-6L
OLE MISS:7W-8L
LSU: 2W-17L
TEXAS A&M: 0W-1L
EAST:
UGA: 18W-47L
FLORIDA:7W-24L
TENN:7W-24L
VANDY:20W-4L
KENTUCKY:17W-8L
MIZZ: 2W-3L
OVERALL- 110W-167L (.397)
GAMECHICKENS VS ACC
COASTAL
DUKE:17W-24L
MIAMI: 5W-8L
VTECH:11W-7L
PITT:1W-3L
UNC: 18W-34L
GATECH:9W-12L
VIRGINIA:21W-13L
ATLANTIC:
FSU: 3W-16L
BC: NOT PLAYED
NCSTATE: 27W-26L
WAKE: 34W-20L
CUSE: NOT PLAYED
LOUISVILLE: NOT PLAYED
CLEMSON:42W-65L
OVERALL: 188W-228L (.451)
CLEMSON VS ACC
COASTAL:
DUKE: 36W-16L
MIAMI: 3W-6L
VTECH:20W-12L
VIRGINIA: 38W-8L
PITT: 0W-1L
UNC:36W-19L
GT: 27W-49L
ATLANTIC:
FSU: 8W-20L
BC: 13W-9L
CUSE: 2W-1L
NCSTATE- 54W-28L
LOUISVILLE: 1W-0L
WAKE: 62W-17L
OVERALL: 300W-187L (.616)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:33 AM
|
|
I know, that is no joke. We need to get better in conference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1482]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 2011
Joined: 3/4/11
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 10:46 AM
|
|
As the record above indicates, it looks like the cacks suck pretty badly on the whole, in any conference, throughout pretty much any significant stretch of years.
In fact, it seems the cacks may well be one of the worst teams ever to play college football.
Welp, the cacks still won their division one time, so I guess the answer to your question, pumascreed, is that if one of the crappiest teams ever could have a decent year or three in the SEC, a team with with a much better record in both relevant conferences likely would as well.
Thanks for bringing it up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3820]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3025
Joined: 8/19/08
|
Hey Dustin Diamond, the only one of those that matters
Nov 13, 2014, 12:09 PM
|
|
Is the one that's 65-42. Oh and to be technically correct it's 65-42-4. Go back and find maw maw chicken's teet for awhile and come back when you've learned something...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Hey Dustin Diamond, the only one of those that matters
Nov 13, 2014, 1:45 PM
|
|
I didn't post the record with the ties because they don't mean anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12314
Joined: 3/28/06
|
Is this really a pissing contest you want to get into?
Nov 13, 2014, 12:54 PM
|
|
USuCk Football did not start in 2009 and end in 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93672]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95422
Joined: 12/25/09
|
RA this troll and it will crawl back under its bridge.***
Nov 13, 2014, 12:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1052]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 1977
Joined: 7/8/13
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 1:39 PM
|
|
USuC vs Clemson 42-65
USuC vs UNC 18-34-4
USuC vs FSU 3-16
USuC vs Georgia tech 9-12
USuC vs Duke 17-24-3
USuC vs Maryland 11-17
USuC vs Miami 5-8-2
Impressive acc stats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 1:44 PM
|
|
nice repost...glad you could add something to the conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10859]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7646
Joined: 1/6/04
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 2:14 PM
|
|
that's a bunch of sec games we've played over the past 5 years...I mean...you only go back 5 years...right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Just double checking records
Nov 13, 2014, 2:42 PM
|
|
clemson is 4-6 in the last 5 years...glad you brought that up
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2609]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6653
Joined: 9/1/11
|
now post USuCks record against the ACC***
Nov 13, 2014, 2:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 54
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
