Replies: 36
| visibility 1
|
CU Guru [1947]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1095
Joined: 7/15/11
|
Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 2:13 PM
|
|
ESPN guys keep saying over and over, ND lost in that "rain" to "Clemzon." I still can't figure out how it only was a "monsoon" when ND had the ball.
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10328]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 14017
Joined: 11/9/04
|
i'm also trying to figure out how........
Nov 18, 2015, 2:15 PM
|
|
"Notre Dame was a 2-point conversion away from winning at Clemson"
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1793]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 1387
Joined: 11/1/03
|
= ND lost to rain at Clemson***
Nov 18, 2015, 2:15 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2829]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3047
Joined: 2/2/11
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 2:18 PM
|
|
I directly remember all the experts said that because of the rain it would favor ND because they had a better RB, O-line and D-line. Seems they can't make up their mind on if the rain helped them or hurt them.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [78616]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23325
Joined: 8/21/06
|
Exactly and going into that game all of the espn tallking
Nov 18, 2015, 2:19 PM
|
|
heads preached how ND's awesome OL and rb's would devastate Clemson in a rainy game because they had the superior talent.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4302]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3764
Joined: 11/18/03
|
This is my problem with them all emphasizing the rain issue
Nov 18, 2015, 2:25 PM
|
|
Going into the game, EVERYONE said the weather was an advantage to ND and gave us less of a chance to win. So then we win, and the only reason we won was BEACAUSE of the rain?!?! Did they all go to SCar and have Coot Logic?
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [42]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 79
Joined: 11/6/14
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 2:24 PM
|
|
And it only rained on ND.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I don't understand the problem. Do you believe
Nov 18, 2015, 2:25 PM
|
|
the statement somehow connotes something negative about Clemson? The fact that Notre Dame lost to Clemson in a rainy game is a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5267]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6896
Joined: 11/5/12
|
Re: I don't understand the problem. Do you believe
Nov 18, 2015, 2:38 PM
|
|
Because the things they say to go with that are implying the rain was the reason for the loss. ..i.e. they think ND would have won on a dry day basing off 4th qtr stats. It's called butt hurt by a group that started the season saying the ACC would be the conference left out, and now having to see one of their teams sitting at #1. Trying to find a way to discredit that they were biased by finding the flaw in that #1 team's biggest win.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I think it's probably being said as a positive for ND
Nov 18, 2015, 2:40 PM
|
|
more than a negative for Clemson, but I don't know. I'm just going off of what the original poster said.
I would think it a positive thing for both teams.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [57939]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46066
Joined: 4/23/00
|
No, I've heard them discussing it before, and they
Nov 18, 2015, 3:16 PM
|
|
more or less said, in so many words, that the Clemson win/Notre Dame loss, however you want to look at it, must be taken with a grain of salt since it was played in a heavy rain, and clearly implied that the rain was a mitigating factor and therefore, yeah, Clemson must get credit for the win, but come on, we all know that the outcome very likely would have been different if the game had been "fair" and played on a dry field.
There is absolutely no mistake that it was/is being spun that way by many of the talking heads.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5267]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6896
Joined: 11/5/12
|
Re: No, I've heard them discussing it before, and they
Nov 18, 2015, 4:28 PM
|
|
^ Yep. Can't remember exact wordings off the top of my head, but I clearly have heard it stated not in a way that makes it positive to both. It has been treated several times (to the point I screamed at the TV) as if they are trying to discredit Clemson.
Point in fact 1) they never talk about Clemson dominating the first 3 quarters 2) nor do they talk about Clemson defense playing conservative in the 4th allowing the 1 qtr comeback. They point straight to the rain as the main argument (obviously trying to utilize the same as they are with Bama's loss...the 4 turnovers..trying to imply the rain did it all, not that one didn't happen because the kicker's helmet hit the ball hard and knocked it out). Then they talk about how Notre Dame came back within 2 points, and I quote, "to nearly win it". They basically sound like a Notre Dame board does....where they act like they were at some point ever in the lead, and that the 2 point conversion would have been for a win, not for an OT chance...while completely discrediting Clemson's defensive stand on that conversion failure, and Clemson dominated for 3 quarters straight going into the 4th up 21-3.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3507]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4148
Joined: 9/27/14
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24467]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 41987
Joined: 7/31/10
|
...and thanks for the money.***
Nov 18, 2015, 3:39 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93156]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95153
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Why the qualifier?
Nov 18, 2015, 3:38 PM
[ in reply to I don't understand the problem. Do you believe ] |
|
Did the rain make a difference as to the outcome? If you watched the game, and we all know you did, you'll admit that the probably that Clemson would have gone on and scored three or four more times was hampered by the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
No, but I do think it makes a difference in how we
Nov 18, 2015, 3:56 PM
|
|
view the teams now. The teams played a game in stressful and unusual conditions. In Clemson's case, they came out on top.
It's kind of like if Clemson had beaten ND on the road. The game being on the road made it a more stressful situation, and winning the game would be even more impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3507]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4148
Joined: 9/27/14
|
It's a subtle excuse being made for ND by eSPIN. They
Nov 18, 2015, 5:28 PM
[ in reply to I don't understand the problem. Do you believe ] |
|
know what they are doing, and so does everyone else. They can't just say, "ND's one loss to Clemson in a close one." (It really wasn't close). They have to accent it with "monsoon" and "a 2 point conversion away in a hurricane" just to make ND look like "almost winners."
That game was never out of Clemson's control. THAT is the fact.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5470]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5399
Joined: 3/9/11
|
Re: It's a subtle excuse being made for ND by eSPIN. They
Nov 18, 2015, 5:33 PM
|
|
Tired of seeing this crap about the ND losers losing. Clemson played in the same conditions as ND, so what is the problem? Poor excuse as far ad I am concerned. They lost and that is a fact. ESPN needs to get over it.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3507]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4148
Joined: 9/27/14
|
Exactly***
Nov 18, 2015, 5:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5737]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5984
Joined: 2/3/10
|
Clemson beat Notre Dame,
Nov 18, 2015, 2:36 PM
|
|
in a rain-soaked game!
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Yep...it can be used as a positive for Clemson too.
Nov 18, 2015, 2:39 PM
|
|
The difference is Clemson's resume speaks for itself, with the big fat zero in the loss column.
The rain was an element that both teams had to deal with. It's a positive that Clemson won in those conditions. ND can feel good about playing well against a great opponent in the rain, even though they lost.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46675]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30633
Joined: 8/11/15
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 2:40 PM
|
|
Yes because it only rained when ND had the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17067
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 2:42 PM
|
|
That's not what is being argued. They're arguing the rain hurt ND worse than it hurt Clemson.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24337]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15053
Joined: 2/13/15
|
#NOBOWLA
Nov 18, 2015, 3:54 PM
|
|
3-7
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3507]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4148
Joined: 9/27/14
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 5:21 PM
[ in reply to Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game." ] |
|
It's not as if ND plays in a dome. There's nothing to argue. They play outside on natural grass just like us. That "rain" sh!t is played out, and ridiculous.
ND should join the SEC. They get the same excuses.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8015]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7922
Joined: 5/27/08
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 2:44 PM
|
|
With credit to @El Swann
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9174]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 14648
Joined: 2/5/02
|
No Fair! Stomp
Nov 18, 2015, 2:46 PM
|
|
No... stomp stomp stomp.. Fair!
STOMP!
No Fair!
-Doc
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2918]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4152
Joined: 8/17/99
|
When it rained the heaviest in the 2nd half...
Nov 18, 2015, 3:34 PM
|
|
didn't Notre Dame play it's best? They were lucky it rained and gave them a chance of winning.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [63627]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 32820
Joined: 12/3/03
|
DO NOT BRING ACTUAL FACTS INTO THIS CONVERSATION!
Nov 18, 2015, 3:46 PM
|
|
nm
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24337]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15053
Joined: 2/13/15
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 3:45 PM
|
|
I swear.... they REALLY need to stop making excuses for them....
We played in the rain.....just like they played in the rain....
(And just like another poster said) they've failed to mention that we dominated them 80% of the game......
IN THE RAIN!!!!!!!!!.........
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [980]
TigerPulse: 37%
Posts: 3073
Joined: 3/6/03
|
Didn't Clemson have to play in that same rain?
Nov 18, 2015, 3:56 PM
|
|
nm
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9633]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11380
Joined: 9/10/99
|
That's not a big deal. They seem to be giving Clemson credit
Nov 18, 2015, 4:38 PM
|
|
for winning the game...or they'd be saying Clemson hasn't beaten anyone.
They say that when trying to talk Notre Dame's way into the Top 4...they're not trying to talk Clemson's way out of it.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3507]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4148
Joined: 9/27/14
|
Before the game they were saying that the rain would "help"
Nov 18, 2015, 5:16 PM
|
|
ND, (Howard and Pollack). Now they are just being idiots because as usual, they were wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3507]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4148
Joined: 9/27/14
|
Had it been dry, we would've beat them by 50.***
Nov 18, 2015, 5:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1163]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 967
Joined: 11/17/13
|
excuses are for losers. never hear a winner making excuses
Nov 18, 2015, 6:17 PM
|
|
They need to take off their panties and man up.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2111]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2835
Joined: 6/30/14
|
Re: Notre Dame lost at Clemson "in a rain-soaked game."
Nov 18, 2015, 6:27 PM
|
|
I talked about that on Twitter last night when the ESPN guys were talking about it and it was favorited by Mr. Clemson himself Eric MacLain
I know i know he isn't supposed to be on social media but these guys are listening to the "experts" fuel to their fire!!
|
|
|
|
Replies: 36
| visibility 1
|
|
|