|
Replies: 44
| visibility 3716
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
So I was going to point out to the 12 year old coot, Gville85Coot
1
11
11
Aug 7, 2025, 5:02 PM
|
|
He made a coot comment below that heād rather play in the ACC because the schedule would be easier.
I wanted to explain to him that our schedules are typical pretty close and explain to him the inverse effect we have on each others schedule, that is, we boost their SOS and they reduce ours. Happens every single year.
So I decided to see what the current rankings are. The data shows are ranked ahead of them in every preseason poll, so the inverse SOS effect applies, yet we still have a harder schedule than them.
Upcoming season, per teamrankings.com:
More SOS info, and keep in mind we were higher and considerably higher ranked than them in each and every one of these seasons -
2025: Clemson 7th, Coots 17th
Clemson will crush them in the roach.
2024: Coots 12th. Clemson 22nd (inverse effect)
Coots won 17-14
2023: Clemson 21st, Coots 23rd
Clemson won 16-7
2022 Clemson 21st, Coots 28th
Coots won 31-30
2021: Clemson 11th, Coots 44th
Clemson won 30-0
2020: Clemson 3rd, Coots 36th
Coots chickened out - would have been crushed
2019: Clemson 3rd, Coots 15th
Clemson won 38-3
2018: Clemson 2nd, Coots 20th
Clemson won 56-35
2017: Clemson 4th, Coots 48th
Clemson won 34-10
2016: Clemson 3rd, Coots 59th
Clemson won 56-7
2015: Clemson 4th, Coots 41st
Clemson won 37-32
2014: Clemson 29th, Coots 30th
Clemson won 35-17
So only ONE time in the playoff era have the Coots played a harder schedule, and thatās because we raised their SOS and they lowered ours.
In the same time frame, Clemson is 8-2 vs the Coots.
In the entire playoff era, out of the last 11 completed seasons, the Coots have played a harder schedule exactly ONE time and are 2-8 bs Clemson.
The avg SOS thru the playoff era (incl. 2025:
Clemson 10.9 , Coots 33.9
Clemsonās avg schedule is 20 spots higher than the Coots
The score differential in the playoff era:
Clemson 34.5, Coots 15.8
Hey Gville85Tiger, how do you like these facts?
|
|
|
|
 |
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Summary
1
6
6
Aug 7, 2025, 5:09 PM
|
|
Since the playoff era started in 2014, Clemson has played a more difficult schedule in every single year but 1.
Clemsonās avg SOS over that span is 10.9
Coots avg SOS over that span is 33.9
Clemsonās avg SOS in the playoff era is 23 spots higher than the coots
Oooh, Gville85Tiger, donāt run and hide now š¤£
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2822]
TigerPulse: 64%
33
|
Re: Summary
2
Aug 8, 2025, 12:03 AM
|
|
You took this time and effort to appease the troll, therefore focusing on the coots, which is probably exactly what they wanted. I would just block em and move on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [5044]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: So I was going to point out to the 12 year old coot, Gville85Coot
7
7
Aug 7, 2025, 5:12 PM
|
|
The ACC is an easy garbage conference, our SOS is higher because we go out and intentionally schedule 1 or 2 big time non conference games to help supplement our weak conference opponents vs scheduling sister sadie dinkins school for the blind. If you solely compare an average ACC conference schedule vs an SEC or Big10 conference schedule with the OOCs taken out thereās no way you can say the two are comparable
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [189]
TigerPulse: 36%
12
|
Re: So I was going to point out to the 12 year old coot, Gville85Coot
1
4
Aug 7, 2025, 7:29 PM
|
|
Braves Fan is spot onš
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
One year in the playoff era with a higher SOS
1
2
Aug 7, 2025, 7:40 PM
|
|
Yet, in the playoff era you havenāt once finished ranked ahead of us.
Easier schedule virtually every year, and you still donāt win as many games? Is that what youāre saying junior?
Is āfailā your middle name?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [5044]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: One year in the playoff era with a higher SOS
2
Aug 8, 2025, 9:20 AM
|
|
2 things can be true. The SEC is a tougher conference to play in than the ACC, however even if we played the same schedule as the coots weād outperform them because weāre a better program than those dirt peckers representing Richland County Jail
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
The site shows us having a harder league schedule in 8 of 11 seasons
1
Aug 9, 2025, 2:19 PM
|
|
And harder overall schedule in 10 of 11 seasons.
My point stands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29678]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9920]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
No, that is definitely SOS. The only year its not complete is this one.
1
Aug 7, 2025, 7:42 PM
|
|
Obviously thatās because it hasnāt been played yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9920]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
Re: No, that is definitely SOS. The only year its not complete is this one.
Aug 7, 2025, 7:55 PM
|
|
No. Wrong. Blatantly and completely wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
No sir, I am correct. They arent just *rankings* as you said.
2
Aug 7, 2025, 11:53 PM
|
|
They are predictive SOS rankings, albeit for a season that hasnāt seen a game yet.
Everything else is SOS from a January of each season, after all the games have been played.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6851]
TigerPulse: 96%
41
|
Re: So I was going to point out to the 12 year old coot, Gville85Coot
1
Aug 7, 2025, 6:21 PM
|
|
Arguing with a 12 year old,your wife,a left winged democrat or
an atheist, is UN-winnable...just let the chips fall where they
may and just relax.We all have an opinion and thats the way it
is.I do agree with you tho.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9920]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
Re: So I was going to point out to the 12 year old coot, Gville85Coot
Aug 7, 2025, 7:14 PM
|
|
Thereās nothing to agree with. Itās blatantly inaccurate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Youre confused bud***
1
Aug 7, 2025, 7:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9920]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
Re: Youre confused bud***
2
Aug 7, 2025, 7:57 PM
|
|
You are so ignorant.
You shouldnāt even need to look at stats to know the truth. Yet, you are looking at stats which are right in front of you and you donāt know how to understand them. You are making a fool of yourself while trying to call out another poster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Citing the data from a known and respected website is ignorant
1
Aug 7, 2025, 8:01 PM
|
|
There are various opinions out there and thereās nothing āignorantā about referencing one of them.
Take a breath dude. Youāll be okay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9920]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
Re: Citing the data from a known and respected website is ignorant
1
Aug 7, 2025, 8:50 PM
|
|
Do yourself a favor. Look at Oregonās schedule. Thatās the 6th toughest? No. Not close.
Also consider that your top 10 in the āSOS rankingsā are generally roughly the same top 10 teams in all preseason polls. You think itās logical that the top 10 teams are also the teams with the 10 hardest schedules?
Again - you are looking at rankings. Not SOS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Nope. The numbers I provided are definitely SOS.
1
Aug 7, 2025, 11:01 PM
|
|
All the numbers prior to 2025/26 are real and tabulated in January of each respective season. Those are end of season SOS rankings.
Obviously the data for 2025-26 has not yet accumulated. Iām not so sure why youāre so fixated on a season that hasnāt occurred yet, but that leads me to believe youāre confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [35173]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 37089
Joined: 2003
|
. Coots are stupid. Espn makes gazillions off thier gullibility***
1
Aug 7, 2025, 6:55 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [83822]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 31309
Joined: 2018
|
The irony of a troll trolling a troll.***
3
Aug 7, 2025, 7:05 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
LOL. Thats all you do anytime you post.***
2
Aug 7, 2025, 7:43 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [83822]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 31309
Joined: 2018
|
Re: LOL. Thats all you do anytime you post.***
2
Aug 7, 2025, 9:39 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19111]
TigerPulse: 95%
52
Posts: 28825
Joined: 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [83822]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 31309
Joined: 2018
|
We should start a gofundme
2
Aug 7, 2025, 9:45 PM
|
|
for the Stan's mental health therapy.
All his family have obviously abandoned him on that front CM ShackĀ®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [16854]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 10595
Joined: 2009
|
When you have to follow up your initial post with an executive summary
Aug 7, 2025, 7:49 PM
|
|
It might be a sign that itās a little too much
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [331]
TigerPulse: 100%
15
|
Re: So I was going to point out to the 12 year old coot, Gville85Coot
Aug 7, 2025, 8:47 PM
|
|
Are you looking at end of year SOS or are you filtering the date for the SOS of each team for the few days prior to them playing one another?
If you are looking at end of year SOS, then you are likely upwardly skewing Clemsonās SOS from 2015-2020 since we played in the playoffs and those playoff teams would have been included in the SOS ranking. You would need to compare the SOS rankings for their in-season competition to yield a fair comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Its really mostly numbers and line breaks
1
Aug 7, 2025, 11:50 PM
|
|
The image I copied was the current predictive SOS for the upcoming season. Based on betting numbers, I think. Regardless, Iām not too concerned with a season that hasnāt occurred yet.
The SOS numbers that followed were all end of season, calculated based on metrics over the course of an entire season. They are from each seasonās final SOS rankings, from roughly the middle of January. After all games are done. No filters.
I didnāt skew anything though. I took all the seasons from the beginning of the playoff era, 2014. Yes of course it includes our playoff games, but those count in SOS too.
The coots played a harder schedule in exactly one season in the entire playoff era. I mean, I could have gone back further, but it was already a lot of numbers.
Iām not saying every website out there aligns exactly the same. Iām sure they are all over the place, but I do think the results wonāt too much different if different at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [9920]
TigerPulse: 100%
44
|
Re: Its really mostly numbers and line breaks
Aug 8, 2025, 12:43 AM
|
|
Actual SOS metrics are vastly different than the nonsense you have misrepresented here. I provided you like 5 examples as proof.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Whoosh.. Such vitriol lol
1
Aug 8, 2025, 1:09 AM
|
|
You are hyper focused on the SOS rankings, and yes they are SOS, from a season that hasnāt even started yet. That wasnāt even the point. There is some confusion here.
You did think the image represented straight rankings and not predictive SOS rankings, no? If so, that was wrong. Blatantly wrong to quote you.
All of the other seasons listed are also SOS rankings, after the
So yeah, what Iām saying is our avg SOS in the playoff era has been around 11th. Per the same site the gamecocks are around 34th.
I donāt understand what youāre thinking or why do you seem so uptight? š¤·š»āāļø
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [331]
TigerPulse: 100%
15
|
Re: Its really mostly numbers and line breaks
1
Aug 8, 2025, 7:21 AM
[ in reply to Its really mostly numbers and line breaks ] |
|
If youāre going to include playoff games, then you are absolutely skewing the comparison of who had the harder schedule. The easy counter argument is that the easier in-season schedule gave us an easier path to making the playoffs awarding us the opportunity to play tougher teams and inflate our SOS.
For instance, take the 2019-2020 season where a mid-Texas A&M team was our toughest opponent in season, and we played them at home. If you look at the SOS for the week prior to playing USC, we were 31st and they were 12th. Itās not until we played Ohio State and LSU in the playoffs that our ranking went up to 3rd. Did we deserve to make the playoffs? Absolutely. Based on our schedule? Not really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
The coot insinuated they play harder schedules. The site says they dont
1
Aug 8, 2025, 1:41 PM
|
|
And itās not even close.
If the coots were good enough they could include playoff games too. But they have never made the playoffs. So youāre saying the fact weāve made the playoffs 7x means those games shouldnāt count in SOS?
Of course they count. Weāve won more games against harder schedules. Why is that concept so hard to grasp?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [331]
TigerPulse: 100%
15
|
Re: The coot insinuated they play harder schedules. The site says they dont
Aug 8, 2025, 2:22 PM
|
|
Thereās a big difference in having a schedule with tough teams scheduled on a week-to-week basis where you have a shorter amount of time to rest and prepare for the teams you are facing relative to having a schedule where your toughest games (at most 2) at the end of year after a rest and time to adequately prepare for the other team.
Hereās an alternative question: Itās been widely debated that Indiana didnāt deserve to be in the playoffs this past year because their schedule was weak. Yet if you look at their SOS at the end of the year, they have a tougher SOS than Clemson. They only played ranked teams in Ohio State and Notre Dame. We played similarly ranked teams in UGA, USC, SMU, and Texas. Who played the tougher schedule?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Im sorry man, but you continue to miss the point.
1
Aug 8, 2025, 9:07 PM
|
|
Team A = more wins over a more difficult schedule
Team B = less wins against a less difficult schedule.
Please help me understand what it is you think youāre arguing? Seems youāre trying too hard to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [331]
TigerPulse: 100%
15
|
Re: Im sorry man, but you continue to miss the point.
1
Aug 9, 2025, 1:27 AM
|
|
Sure. The data you are using makes your comparison and your interpretation of that comparison biased. If you want to make it an unbiased comparison, then compare the SOS of that year for the week prior to the two teams playing. If you did, you'd have the following:
2014: Clemson (33); South Carolina (24)
2015: Clemson (25); South Carolina (43)
2016: Clemson (9); South Carolina (63)
2017: Clemson (5); South Carolina (51)
2018: Clemson (14); South Carolina (15)
2019: Clemson (31); South Carolina (12)
2020: Clemson (2); South Carolina (30) (*Note: Covid year - weird schedules)
2021: Clemson (12); South Carolina (41)
2022: Clemson (25); South Carolina (43)
2023: Clemson (30); South Carolina (33)
2024: Clemson (27); South Carolina (5)
Now you can make the unbiased argument that just because South Carolina was in the SEC, it does not mean that they played the tougher schedule (particularly given how we schedule out-of-conference games). This also removes any confounding that would occur based on how each team affects the other's SOS, and it shows our SOS for our full announced schedule without including any of the additional games that we earned to play in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
So beating teams like Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Ohio State, and Alabama
Aug 9, 2025, 2:17 PM
|
|
Those games shouldnāt count in these arguments? Again, if the coots were good enough to play and win playoff games, then they could count them too. But they werenāt.
My statements all along remain accurate:
Clemson beat the coots 8 out of 10 games in the CFP era, and the coots chickened out in 2020, which would have been another win for us.
Clemson had considerably more wins every year of the CFP era.
Clemson finished ranked considerably higher in every year of the CFP era.
And we did all that with -
Clemson played a harder season schedule in 10 of 11 seasons in the CFP era.
Clemson played harder league schedules in 8 of 11 seasons in the CFP era.
Glad you finally agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [331]
TigerPulse: 100%
15
|
Re: So beating teams like Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Ohio State, and Alabama
1
Aug 9, 2025, 2:49 PM
|
|
Well, Iāve never disagreed with your hypothesis. I just disagree with the data you were using to make your claim, as the univariate comparison you are attempting to make that is based on end of seasons SOS has noticeable confounding factors that need to be adjusted for.
As an additional note, you cannot definitively state that we played a harder league schedule relative to USC unless you adjust for the non-conference games to make the comparison solely between their in-season SEC SOS versus our in-season ACC SOS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
Sigh
Aug 9, 2025, 3:26 PM
|
|
Clemson has won considerably more games and finished significantly higher ranked in every season of the CFP era. And that was against harder schedules nearly every season in the CFP era.
Case closed, thanks. Have a good afternoon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [331]
TigerPulse: 100%
15
|
Re: Sigh
1
Aug 9, 2025, 3:54 PM
|
|
Agreed, Clemson has had a tougher in-season schedule relative to South Carolina. I'm happy to close this discussion as well since for the other points, we will have to agree that we will disagree. As a close though, I'll provide you with the in-conference in-season SOS between 2014 to 2024:
2014: Clemson (43); South Carolina (24)
2015: Clemson (46); South Carolina (41)
2016: Clemson (14); South Carolina (60)
2017: Clemson (9); South Carolina (64)
2018: Clemson (39); South Carolina (13)
2019: Clemson (61); South Carolina (15)
2020: Clemson (5); South Carolina (34) (*Note: Covid year)
2021: Clemson (27); South Carolina (36)
2022: Clemson (42); South Carolina (27)
2023: Clemson (26); South Carolina (27)
2024: Clemson (60); South Carolina (9)
This does not paint the picture that our league schedule was harder than their league schedule for the majority of the last decade. We improved our SOS each year by how we scheduled our out-of-conference games, which helped Clemson have a tougher in-season schedule than South Carolina.
Have a wonderful day! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2822]
TigerPulse: 64%
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15601]
TigerPulse: 99%
50
|
What are you agreeing with, his agreement with me?
Aug 9, 2025, 3:28 PM
|
|
Coots wussed out. Iām aware the SEC skipped their OOC games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [83822]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 31309
Joined: 2018
|
Even the other bored trolls are trolling you,
2
Aug 9, 2025, 4:07 PM
|
|
š š
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19111]
TigerPulse: 95%
52
Posts: 28825
Joined: 2003
|
He'd be better to just stick to posting in OJ's point party...I'm waiting for
1
Aug 9, 2025, 5:15 PM
|
|
the College Football Warehouse data points to make an appearance, that's typically been his closer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [83822]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 31309
Joined: 2018
|
Soon. He's melting down to the point he starts
1
Aug 9, 2025, 6:07 PM
|
|
Captain obvious posts so he can crybaby about people TD'ing him for spamming the bored with nonsense. The pattern continues.
He never has mentioned having an autistic son ago likely because he made it up to get sympathy. That didn't work either. š
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 44
| visibility 3716
|
|
|
50
