There has been a lot of discussion (argumentation?) on here

Jan 3, 2023, 8:59 PM

for awhile about the continued "eliteness" of Clemson football. I will contribute only this to that discussion:

Eliteness is not only in the eye of the beholder, it is very hard to quantify by any measurable metric.

Would 11 wins do it this year? 13 FBS teams wound up with at least 11 wins, and one of those was Texas-San Antonio.

Would having only 1 LOSS do it? A lot closer, maybe, as no more than 3 teams will wind up with one loss, only two, if Georgia beats TCU as many expect them to. But, one of those one loss teams is Michigan, who TCU just defeated head to head, fairly handily. So, is Michigan still elite with their one loss? Unless there is only ONE elite team each year, you pretty much have to consider them that, at least for this year.

Others measure eliteness as a certain level of success over an extended period of time. So, who makes the rules over what time frame is required before you ARE considered elite, and then, what time period must pass before you are NOT considered that anymore? Or, who makes the rules about what level of success is required to get to that exalted plateau in the first place?

As you may be able to tell from the tone of this post, I don't really buy into that whole "elite" discussion to begin with. My main reason for that is, that just like the strength or weakness of conferences or individual teams, a lot of it is media driven Mullhint. They want to prop up their darlings, and tear down everybody else. And, some of the points are at least semi-valid. All schedules are not created anywhere near equal. All wins are not equally impressive. But, discussions of those things bring so much subjectivity into the room, that any verdict yea or nay about eliteness is fundamentally flawed, because there ARE no fundamentals to judging it.

Why not just enjoy each season for what it is? Was this season everything we hoped it would be? For some, probably. For others, certainly not. But, I can tell you one thing for sure. It was a he.ll of a lot better than about twenty straight seasons from about 1991-2010. It was also at least the equal of many during the first Golden Era, the Danny Ford years. But, much like Danny, Dabo is now a victim of his own success. We not only WANT more of the same, we EXPECT it. And, we can be terribly bitchy and whiney when we don't GET more of the same. Why, that alone must make us ELITE!

<img border=

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

needs to think back to the "5 bombs" that coot fans were so fond of flashing. Every time someone says this was good needs to pull up the pictures of chicken people holding up 5 fingers as Dabo graciously accepts photo opportunities with them.

We had the talent to beat USuC this year. We had the talent to go toe to toe with Notre Dame and Tennessee. We could have won those games. Instead, we're dealing with the worst attitudes of a fan base that is completely without class.

Saying 11-3 is good is accepting under performing the potential of the team. It is accepting that we're getting dumped on by coots and embarrassed by teams we should beat.

Yes, compared to 90% of schools, 11-3 is good. But if "BEST IS THE STANDARD" applies, and any mention of coot winning is unacceptable, so is the record this year.

There has been a lot of discussion (argumentation?) on here

Re: There has been a lot of discussion (argumentation?) on here

Re: There has been a lot of discussion (argumentation?) on here

I agree, but who defines our potential?

Re: There has been a lot of discussion (argumentation?) on here

Everyone that accepts the 11-3 results for the season

Best is the standard is being misinterpreted

Re: Best is the standard is being misinterpreted

Re: There has been a lot of discussion (argumentation?) on here

TigerBoard POTD